New  Theological  Works 


NEW  AND  SHORTER  EDITION. 

MEMOIR    OF    GEORGE    HOWARD   WILKINSON.      Bishop  of   St. 

Andrews,  formerly  Bishop  of  Tniro.    By  ARTHUR  JAMES  MASON,  D.D.,  One  of  his 

Chaplains.     With  2  Portraits.     Crown  Svo.     6s.  net. 

The  chief  point  in  which  this  edition  differs  from  the  earlier  ones  is  the  omission  of  a 
considerable  number  of  letters. 

HOME  LIFE  IN  ENGLAND.     By  H.  L.  PAGET,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Stepney. 

Crown  Svo,  2s.  net. 

CONTENTS  :— Introductory— Old  and  Young— Brothers  and  Sisters— The  Enrichment  of 
Home — Work — Religion. 

THE    CHURCH:     HER  BOOKS  AND  HER  SACRAMENTS.      By  E.  E. 

HOLMES,  Hon.  Canon  of  Christ  Church,  and  of  the  Royal  Chapel  of  St.  Katharine.  A 
Course  of  Instructions  given  at  All  Saints,  Margaret  Street,  in  Lent,  1010.  Crown  Svo. 
2J.  6d.  net. 

These  lectures  mere  originally  delivered  as  the  Boyle  Lectures  for  IQIO,  and  were  after- 
wards repeated  in  a  more  popular  form  at  All  Saints,  Margaret  Street. 

SUGGESTIONS  FOR  A  SYLLABUS  IN  RELIGIOUS  TEACHING. 

By  G.  B.  AYRE.  With  an  Introduction  by  M.  E.  SADLER,  LL.D.  Crown  Svo.  is.  net, 
sewed  ;  i*.  6d.  net,  cloth.  [Nearly  ready. 

*»*  There  will  also  be  an  edition  for  Church  Schools,     u.  6d.  net,  sewed  ;  -a.  net,  cloth. 
An  attempt  is  made  in  this  Syllabus  to  give  a  graded  course  of  teaching ;  to  correlate 
Scripture  with  the  child's  education  generally,  and  not  to  teach  anything  that  will  have  to 
be  unlearnt  in  life. 

THE    MORALITY    OF    SOCIAL    PLEASURES.       By    MONTAGUE 

FOWLER,  Rector  of  All  Hallows,  London  Wall.     Crown  Svo.    3$.  6d.  net. 
CONTENTS  :— Chapter  I.  Theatre-Going— II.  Theatricals,  Pageants, Dancing— III.  Rac- 
ing   and  Betting,  and  Gambling— IV.    Week-end  Entertaining— V.    Sunday  Work  and 
Amusements— VI.    Politics— VII.    Gossip    and    Slander— VIII.    Friendship    and    Love— 
IX.  The  Influence  of  Thought. 

LITTLE  SERMONS  ON   THE  SUNDAY   GOSPELS.      By  the  Rev. 

JOHN  WAKE  FORD,  B.D.     Crown  Svo.     5.?.  net. 

This  book  contains  275  short  sermons.  From  the  liturgical  Gospel  of  every  Sunday  in 
the  year  five  texts  are  taken  for  treatment.  The  notes  are  rather  devotional  than 
homiletical  in  character,  and  may  be  used  as  they  stand  for  sick  reading,  or  as  short  ex- 
positions at  early  Communion. 

SERMONS  TO   PASTORS    AND    MASTERS.      By  JOHN    HUNTLEY 

SKRJNE,  M.A.,  author  of  "Pastor  Agnorum,"  "Pastor   Ovium,"  "  What  is  Faith?" 

Crown  Svo.     5*.  net. 

The  sermons  in  this  volume  fall  under  their  common  title  as  having  been  addressed 
either  to  men  and  women  engaged  in  pastoral  or  educational  work,  or  to  audiences  JH 
places  of  the  higher  teaching,  Universities  and  Colleges. 

HANDBOOKS    FOR    THE    CLERGY 

Edited  by  ARTHUR  W.  ROBINSON,  D.D. 
Vicar  of  Allhallows  Barking  by  the  Tower. 

CHURCH  DEFENCE.  By  the  Rev.  H.  J.  CLAYTON,  Special  Lecturer 
and  Preacher  to  the  Central  Church  Committee  for  Defence  and  Instruction. 
Crown  Svo.  2S.  6d.  net. 

LONGMANS,  GREEN,  &  CO.,  39  PATERNOSTER  Row,  LONDON,  E.G. 


New  Theological  Works 


PUSEY  HOUSE  OCCASIONAL  PAPERS,  No.  6.     EPISCOPACY  AND 

VALID  ORDERS  IN  THE  PRIMITIVE  CHURCH.  A  Statement  of  Evidence.  By  DARWKLL 
STONE,  D.D.,  Principal  of  Pusey  House.  Crown  8vo,  paper  cover,  if.  net. 

LEX  IN  CORDE  (THE  LAW  IN  THE  HEART):  STUDIES  m 
THE  PSALTER.  By  W.  EMERY  BARNES,  D.D.,  Fellow  of  Peterhouse,  Hulsean  Pro- 
fessor of  Divinity  in  the  University  of  Cambridge,  Examining  Chaplain  to  the  Bishop 
of  London.  Crown  8vo.  $s.  net. 

CHRISTIAN  PROGRESS,  WITH  OTHER  PAPERS  AND  AD- 
DRESSES.  By  GEORGE  CONGREVE,  M.A.,  of  the  Society  of  St.  John  the  Evangelist, 
Cowley  St.  John,  Oxford.  Crown  8vo.  $s.  net. 

UNTIL  SHILOH  COME.  By  EVELYN  WHISH.  With  Preface  by  the 
Rev.  JESSE  BRETT.  Crown  8vo.  is.  6d,  net. 

AN  EXCERPT  FROM  RELIQUIAE  BAXTERIAN^E ;  or,  MR.  RICH- 
ARD  BAXTER'S  NARRATIVE  OF  THE  MOST  MEMORABLE  PASSAGES  OF  His  LIFE  AND 
TIMES.  Also  an  Essay  by  Sir  JAMBS  STEPHEN  on  Richard  Baxter  (Reprinted  from 
"Essays  in  Ecclesiastical  Biography").  With  a  Preface  and  Notes  on  both  the  above 
by  FRANCIS  JOHN,  Bishop  of  Chester.  8vo.  $s.  net. 

THE   WAY  OF  FELLOWSHIP.     By  F.  W.  DRAKE,  Priest-in-Charge  of 

St.  John's,  Wilton  Road,  S.W.     Crown  8vo.     zs.  6d.  net. 

These  papers  deal  with  the  simplicities  0/"  Catholic  Faith  and  Practice.  They  are 
addressed 'to  those 'who  are  living the  ordered Sacramental life  of 'the  faithfulCommunicant. 

FROM  SLAVERY  TO  FREEDOM :  BEING  THE  STORY  OF  THE  CHILDREN 

OF  ISRAEL  FROM  THE  BIRTH  OF  MOSES  TO  THE  ENTRY  INTO  CANAAN,  TOI.D  TO 
CHILDREN.  By  S.  B.  MACY,  -author  of  "  In  the  Beginning."  With  8  coloured 
plates  and  60  other  illustrations  by  TONY  SARG.  410.  31.  dd.  net. 

The  book  is  in  continuation  of  the  Author  s  '  In  the  Beginning'  in  which  the  matter  of 
the  Baok  of  Genesis  is  retold  for  children.  Mrs.  Macy  intends  to  issue  a  further  volume, 
'  The  Book  of  the  Kingdom,'  in  which  she  will  deal  with  the  period  from  the  birth  of 
Samuel  to  the  death  of  David. 

A  ROMAN  DIARY,  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS  RELATING  TO 
THE  PAPAL  INQUIRY  INTO  ENGLISH  ORDINATIONS,  1896.  By  T.  A. 
LACEY.  8vo. 

This  book  is  published  for  the  purpose  of  placing  in  a  clear  light  the  part  that  was  taken 
by  Father  Puller  and  Mr.  Lacey  in  the  inquiry  into  English  Ordinations  ordered  by  the 
Pope  Leo  XIII.  It  consists  mainly  of  documents  written  at  the  time,  but  an  Introduction 
summarises  the  position  from  the  point  of  view  of  to-day.  There  are  many  personal 
references  to  those  engaged  in  the  inquiry. 

THE  DAWN  OF  MODERN  ENGLAND:   BEING  A  HISTORY  OF  THE 

REFORMATION  IN  ENGLAND.  By  CARLOS  LUMSDEN.  8vo.  gs.  net. 
The  object  of  this  volume  is  to  explain  historically  the  reasons  for  and  the  causes  of  our 
modern  religious  and  economic  problems,  together  with  a  narrative  of  the  political,  social 
and  economic  history  of  the  period.  It  has  been  written  from  the  Roman  Catholic  stand- 
point :  the  author's  view  of  the  Reformation  being  that  it  was  a  struggle  between  modern 
individualism  and  the  semi-socialism  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

THE   LIFE  AND   LEGEND  OF  THE  LADY  ST.  CLARE :  TRANS- 

LATED    FROM    THE     FRENCH    VERSION    (1563)    OF     BROTHER    FRANCIS    DU    PUIS.        By 

CHARLOTTE  BALFOUR,  with  an  Introduction  by  Father  CUTHBERT,  O.S.F.C..  and  24 

Illustrations.     Crown  8vo.     4*.  6d.  net. 

This  is  an  English  Translation  of  a  quaint  sixteenth-century  French  version  of  Thomas 
ofCelano'slegendofSt.  Clare  of  Assisi — the  companion  and  friend  of  St.  Francis,  and  the 
Foundress  of  the  Second  Order  of  Franciscans,  or  the  Poor  Clares  as  they  are  now  called. 
Father  Cuthbert's  introduction  deals  with  the,  personality  of  St.  Clare  and  how  she 
preserved  the  spirit  of  '  Holy  Poverty '  in  her  rule. 


LONGMANS,  GREEN,  &  CO.,  39  PATERNOSTER  Row,  LONDON,  B.C. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY   AND   OTHER 
DOCUMENTS 


A  ROMAN  DIARY 

AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

RELATING  TO  THE  PAPAL  INQUIRY 
INTO  ENGLISH  ORDINATIONS 
MDCCCXCVI.  BY  T.  A.  LACEY  *  X 


LONGMANS,    GREEN,    AND   CO. 

39  PATERNOSTER   ROW,   LONDON 

NEW   YORK,    BOMBAY,    AND   CALCUTTA 

IQIO 

All  rights  rtserved 


GALLIS 

ANGLVS 

INDESINENTER 

CONIVNCTVS 


2063567 


PREFACE 

THIS  volume  can  hardly  be  called  a  book. 
"  Encore  ne  saurait-on  composer  jamais  un 
livre,"  says  a  recent  French  writer  with  native  or 
acquired  sense  of  form,  "en  remaniant  des  corres- 
pondances."  Still  less  can  you  make  a  book  by 
merely  amassing  a  diary,  letters,  and  some  fugitive 
pieces  of  fourteen  years  ago.  That  is  all  that  I 
have  done.  Then  let  the  result  stand,  not  as  a 
book,  but  as  a  collection. 

Why  is  the  thing  done?  It  needs  justification, 
and  this  is  the  apology.  Fourteen  years  ago,  I 
took  part  in  a  certain  course  of  action  which  was 
misunderstood  at  the  time,  and  which  is  persistently 
misrepresented  even  to-day.  Full  explanation  was 
impossible,  because  others  with  whom  I  had  been 
acting  were  tied  to  silence,  and  I  could  not  fairly 
use  my  greater  freedom.  How  long  the  obligation 
lay  upon  them  I  do  not  know  precisely,  but  some 
of  them  have  now  begun  to  speak,  without  doing 
much  to  dispel  misconceptions,  and  thus  set  me  free 
to  speak  for  my  own  part. 

This  volume,  then,  contains  my  part  of  the  record 
of  what  happened  when  the  late  Pope,  Leo  XIII, 
opened  up  to  fresh  investigation  the  old  question 
of  the  English  ordinations.  A  narrative  newly 


x      A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

written  might  have  some  advantage  of  form ;  but 
there  is  more  safety  in  the  mere  production  of  what 
was  written  at  the  time.  The  collection  is  not 
quite  chaotic,  for  it  has  a  nucleus  in  the  diary  which 
I  kept  during  two  months  of  active  work  at  Rome. 
This  Diary  is  printed  just  as  it  was  written,  for  it  is 
produced  as  evidence. 

There  is  much  in  it  that  gives  me  little  satisfaction, 
much  that  is  trivial,  some  evidence  of  bad  temper, 
and  some  unpleasant  indications  of  ignorance.  It 
has  been  found  necessary,  for  obvious  reasons,  to 
withhold  some  names,  and  half-a-dozen  passages  of 
a  purely  personal  character,  containing  in  all  about 
two  hundred  and  fifty  words,  have  been  omitted  as 
affecting  others  than  myself.  Some  things  I  should 
like  to  omit  on  my  own  account,  but  they  are 
retained  in  order  that  the  evidence  may  be  entire. 
The  Diary  is  intended  to  show  what  was  done, 
what  was  said,  and  what  was  thought ;  to  indicate 
also,  by  its  silences,  what  was  not  done.  For  this 
purpose  it  must  be  produced  as  a  whole ;  excerpts 
would  be  useless.  Severe  demands  are  therefore 
made  on  the  patience  of  the  reader. 

The  Diary  must  be  left  intact,  but  it  seems 
reasonable  to  illustrate,  and  sometimes  to  correct 
it — sometimes  also  to  apologize — in  the  margin. 
Reading  it  after  these  fourteen  years,  I  observe  with 
surprise  how  many  things  are  noted  which  I  have 
completely  forgotten,  how  many  which  I  vividly 
remember  are  unrecorded.  I  have  not  hesitated  to 
draw  upon  my  memory  for  illustration  ;  but  such 


PREFACE  xi 

reminiscences  cannot,  of  course,  be  considered 
evidence  in  the  same  measure  as  the  notes  made 
at  the  time.  I  have  collected  some  extracts  from 
letters  for  further  illustration.  This  section  of  the 
volume  might  easily  be  enlarged ;  but  it  is  hard  to 
know  where  to  stop,  and  it  seems  safer  to  draw 
the  line  rigidly  at  letters  written  by  myself  or 
addressed  to  me. 

No  excuse  is  needed  for  the  addition  of  the  text 
of  Mr.  Gladstone's  Memorandum.  The  fifth  section 
is  concerned  with  the  correction  of  a  mistake,  and, 
one  may  hope,  with  the  settlement  of  a  tiresome 
and  foolish  controversy.  The  sixth  is  needed  for 
the  explanation  of  some  allusions ;  it  deals  with 
documentary  matter  the  importance  of  which  has 
been  greatly  exaggerated,  but  it  also  contains  some- 
thing about  Reginald  Pole  that  is  not  without  a 
certain  interest  even  now.  This  should  be  true 
also  of  the  note  on  the  Provincial  Council  of  Mainz, 
which  may  possibly  stir  up  someone  to  edit  in  con- 
venient form  a  document  of  the  Reformation  period 
that  will  repay  study. 

Of  the  section  De  Re  Anglicana  enough  has  been 
said  in  the  Introduction,  but  it  may  be  necessary  to 
explain  how  I  came  by  the  Risposta.  One  morning 
in  September,  1896,  the  post  brought  me,  without 
any  indication  of  its  source,  a  packet  containing  the 
uncorrected  printer's  proofs  of  this  pamphlet.  One 
hesitated ;  but  the  matter  cried  aloud  for  public 
comment,  and  I  swallowed  my  scruples  about  using 
what  was  thus  placed  in  my  hands.  Perhaps  I  was 


xii      A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

hasty  in  assuming  its  genuineness.  But  public 
notice  was  taken  of  it,  and  it  was  not  disavowed. 
The  text  is  now  published  for  the  first  time.  My 
copy,  as  I  have  said,  is  an  uncorrected  proof ; 
finding  it  impossible  to  obtain  any  other,  I  have  to- 
rely  on  this,  correcting  it  to  the  best  of  my  ability. 
One  incorrigible  sentence  has  been  left  obelized. 

The  remaining  sections  are  aftermath.  Let  me 
have  pardon  for  thinking  it  worth  while  to  recall 
from  oblivion  some  writings  in  which  I  dealt  with 
the  Bull  Apostolicae  C^trae  and  its  defenders.  One 
final  paper  is  added,  in  which  an  historical  prece- 
dent was  adduced  to  show  that  a  pontifical  utter- 
ance of  this  kind  may  pass  out  of  sight. 

At  the  suggestion  of  the  publishers  there  have 
been  added  to  the  volume  Appendices  containing 
the  Bull  itself  and  the  Responsio  Archiepiscoporum 
Angliae.  Monsignor  Moves,  unmindful  of  ancient 
enmities,  has  been  good  enough  to  supply  an 
authentic  copy  of  the  former.  Some  doubt  was 
expressed  about  the  inclusion  of  the  latter,  on  the 
ground  that  it  might  seem  to  link  up  the  action  of 
the  English  hierarchy  too  closely  with  the  adven- 
ture on  which  Father  Puller  and  I  were  engaged. 
But  the  other  contents  of  the  volume  make  it 
plain,  beyond  the  possibility  of  cavil,  that  we 
had  no  official  sanction.  My  own  bishop  would 
not  even  grant  me  formal  leave  of  absence.  The 
benison  of  the  Archbishop  of  York,  which  we  valued 
highly,  was  purely  personal.  Moreover,  the  argu- 
ments of  the  Responsio  are  of  another  order  than 


PREFACE  xiii 

those  which  we  employed.  I  have  explained  in  the 
Introduction  what  was  the  weakness  of  the  position 
which  we  personally  occupied.  The  answer  of  the 
English  hierarchy  was  free  from  that  weakness, 
and  it  is  hardly  desirable  to  recall  the  incidents  of 
the  controversy  without  at  the  same  time  putting 
the  question  on  its  true  and  permanent  footing.  For 
this  reason  I  am  glad  that  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury, 
who  controls  the  copyright  of  the  Responsio,  has 
kindly  allowed  its  inclusion.  He  has  not,  however, 
read  my  volume,  nor  was  he  in  any  way  responsible 
for  the  action  described  in  it. 

I  have  also  been  enabled  to  give  the  text  of  a 
letter  of  Leo  XIII,  acknowledging  the  Archbishops' 
Responsio,  a  document  hitherto,  I  understand, 
aveicSoTov.  It  may  be  defective,  though  the  ladies 
of  the  Cambridge  Type-writing  Agency  in  the 
Adelphi  have  devoted  much  skill  and  industry  to 
the  deciphering  of  a  clumsy  manuscript.  The  copy 
in  my  hands  was  without  signature,  but  I  have  no 
reason  to  doubt  the  authenticity  of  the  letter.  A 
fourth  Appendix  contains  a  Bibliography,  as  com- 
plete as  I  can  make  it,  dating  from  the  time  when 
the  question  was  raised  in  a  new  form  by  M.  Portal. 

I  have  to  thank  the  editors  of  the  Guardian  and 
of  the  Contemporary  Review  for  leave  to  reproduce 
some  articles.  By  favour  of  the  Society  for  Pro- 
moting Christian  Knowledge,  the  volume  also  con- 
tains two  brief  dissertations,  originally  published  as 
tracts  of  the  Church  Historical  Society.  In  every 
case  the  text  has  been  carefully  revised,  but  the 


xiv     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

arguments  have  been  left  as  written,  though  some- 
times guarded  or  corrected  in  the  margin.  I  am 
indebted  to  Mr.  Henry  Gladstone  for  permission 
to  print  matter  from  Mr.  Gladstone's  pen,  and  to 
Mr.  Tilney  Basset  for  a  copy  of  a  letter  of  my 
own,  drawn  from  the  stores  at  Hawarden.  To 
those  who  have  been  kind  enough  to  read  the 
proofs  thanks  are  due  for  much  help,  but  I  will  not 
name  them  lest  they  should  seem  to  be  responsible 
for  things  of  which  they  disapproved.  My  friend 
Miss  Christian  Burke  has  relieved  me  of  the 
grievous  labour  of  preparing  an  Index. 

HIGHGATE,  October  i^th,  1910. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

PREFACE  .  .  .  .        .        ix 

I.     INTRODUCTION    .  .  ...         3 

II.     A  ROMAN  DIARY  .  .  29 

III.  LETTERS  .  .  .         ...       87 

IV.  MR.  GLADSTONE'S  MEMORANDUM  .  .        .139 

V.     THE  ROYAL  MANDATE  FOR  BARLOW'S  CONSECRA- 
TION .     153 

i.  MEMORANDUM  DELIVERED  TO  CARDINAL  MAZ- 

ZELLA .  .  .  .  153 

ii.  LETTERS  TO  THE  EDITOR  OF  THE  TABLET     .     157 
VI.     JULIUS  III  AND  PAUL  IV  .  .         -171 

i.  PAUL  IV  AND  ANGLICAN  ORDERS  .         .     171 

ii.  CARDINAL  POLE'S  DESCRIPTION  OF  THE  ENGLISH 

ORDINAL    .  .  .  .         .     177 

VII.     THE  COUNCIL  OF  MAINZ,  A.D.  1549  .         .     187 

VIII.     THE    PAMPHLET   DE  RE  ANGLICANA    AND    ITS 

CRITICS      .  .  .  .     195 

i.  DE  RE  ANGLICANA      .  .  .         .     195 

ii.  RISPOSTA  ALL'OPUSCOLO  DE  RE  ANGLICANA  .     210 

iii.  THE  RISPOSTA  EXAMINED  .  .         .     240 

IX.     THE  SOURCES  OF  THE  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    253 

i.  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  BULL         .  .         .     253 

ii.  THE  GORDON  DECISION    .  .  .         .272 

X.     THE  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     285 

XI.     THE  INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL    311 

XII.     GREGORY  IX  AND  GREEK  ORDINATIONS     .        .331 


xvi     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

APPENDICES 

I.  SANCTISSIMI  DOMINI  NOSTRI  LEONIS  DIVINA  PROVI- 
DENTIA  PAPAE  XIII  LITTERAE  APOSTOLICAE 
DE  ORDINATIONIBUS  ANGLICANIS  .  .  .  341 

II.  RESPONSIO  ARCHIEPISCOPORUM  ANGLIAE  AD  LIT- 
TERAS  APOSTOLICAS  LEONIS  PAPAE  XIII  DE 
ORDINATIONIBUS  ANGLICANIS  .  .  .  354 

III.  RESPONSIO  LEONIS  XIII  AD  ARCHIEPISCOPOS  ANG- 

LIAE .  .     395 

IV.  BIBLIOGRAPHY    .  .  ...     398 
INDEX                .                .  ...     409 


INTRODUCTION 


A   ROMAN    DIARY 

AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

I 
INTRODUCTION 

IN  the  spring-  of  the  year  1894  I  undertook,  with 
some  reluctance,  the  task  of  writing  a  Latin 
dissertation  dealing  with  the  question  of  English 
ordinations  as  discussed  from  the  Roman  point  of 
view.  The  questions  involved  were  tolerably 
familiar  to  me,  but  I  had  always  treated  them  from 
the  standpoint  of  those  who  are  ordinarily  content 
to  accept  as  a  matter  of  course  the  sacramental 
validity  of  the  sacred  ministry  exercised  in  the 
Church  of  England.  In  the  course  of  controversy 
doubts,  historic  or  theological,  were  from  time 
to  time  suggested,  needing  resolution ;  the  kind 
of  apologetic  demanded  for  this  purpose  was 
inevitable ;  but  to  throw  oneself  into  a  hostile 
position,  to  argue  upon  the  assumptions  there 
treated  as  indisputable,  and  to  wrest  from  them  an 
affirmative  conclusion,  was  a  new  employment  from 
which  one  might  naturally  shrink.  But  the  work 
seemed  to  be  needed.  The  fresh  discussion  of  the 
subject  started  by  the  Abb6  Portal  in  the  previous 
year  showed  that  debate  was  not  impossible  ;  it  was 
not  a  question  merely  of  controversy,  but  rather  of 

3 


4       A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

mutual  understanding  ;  a  desire  for  such  understand- 
ing was  in  the  air,  and  Leo  XIII  was  said  to  be 
passionately  bent  on  furthering  the  reconciliation  of 
all  professing  Christians.  If  we  were  to  render  help, 
it  was  useless  to  go  on  arguing  exclusively  from  our 
own  assumptions ;  we  must  place  ourselves  at  the 
standpoint  of  those  from  whom  we  were  separated, 
and  see  whether  we  could  not  compel  them  on  their 
own  principles  to  abridge  the  differences  between 
us  and  them.  This  accordingly  was  attempted. 

I  have  not  to  tell  the  whole  story  of  the  move- 
ment. When  that  is  written,  it  will  be  known  what 
hopes  were  not  unreasonably  entertained,  and  what 
considerations  led  to  the  selection  of  the  question  of 
ordination  as  the  best  subject  of  discussion.  I  am 
concerned  only  with  my  own  part  in  the  movement, 
and  with  certain  misconceptions  which  it  seems  well 
to  remove.  It  was  an  accident  that  brought  me  in. 
A  dissertation  was  required,  and  it  must  be  in  Latin. 
Other  men  were  at  least  as  well  qualified  to  handle 
the  matter,  but  I  was  supposed  to  have  some  special 
skill  in  handling  the  language.  The  need  was 
explained  by  a  correspondent  well  acquainted  with 
the  ground.  "La  cour  de  Rome,"  he  wrote,  "ne 
sait  pas  1'anglais  ;  elle  n'est  informee  de  vos  affaires 
que  par  un  petit  nombre  de  truchements,  qui,  autant 
que  ie  les  connais,  sont  loin  d'avoir  1'esprit  tres 
ouvert.  En  latin  vous  serez  lus ;  en  anglais,  vous 
seriez  interpreted."  In  Latin,  then,  our  argument  was 
to  be  presented.  Mr.  Edward  Denny,  who  had 
recently  published  an  admirable  treatise  on  the 
subject,  was  associated  with  me ;  we  made  his 
Anglican  Orders  and  Jurisdiction  the  basis  of  our 
work,  and  a  pleasanter  partnership  there  could 


INTRODUCTION  5 

hardly  have  been.  In  November  the  book  was  all 
but  finished,  and  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  after 
reading  some  parts  of  it  in  manuscript,  supplied 
a  preface  which  lifted  both  the  Latinity  and  the 
argument  to  a  higher  plane. 

Early  in  the  year  1895  our  Dissertatio  Apologetica 
de  Hierarchia  Anglicana  issued  from  the  Cambridge 
University  Press,  and  was  criticized  with  conspicu- 
ous fairness  in  reviews  and  journals  from  one 
end  of  Europe  to  the  other.  The  Abbe  Boudinhon, 
one  of  our  earliest  reviewers,  described  the  book  in 
the  Canoniste  Contemporain  as  "  Un  modele  de 
discussion  courtoise  et  approfondie,  qui  impose  a 
1'adversaire  le  meme  serieux  dans  les  recherches  et 
les  preuves,  les  memes  sentiments  de  moderation  et 
de  loyaute."  In  the  Zeitschrift  fur  Katholische 
Theologie  the  Jesuit  Father  Emil  Lingens  acknow- 
ledged our  merits  more  cautiously  but  no  less 
effectively.  "  Die  Verfasser,"  he  wrote,  "  beide 
anglicanische  Geistliche,  zeigen  sich  auch  ernstlich 
bestrebt,  ihrer  Gegner  mit  wahrer  Achtung  und 
ohne  jegliche  Bitterkeit  zu  behandeln."  It  was 
clear  that  part  of  our  object  was  attained ;  we  had 
achieved  the  tone  of  sympathetic  discussion.  The 
result  was  seen  in  much  correspondence,  which  fell 
for  the  most  part  into  my  hands,  and  it  thus  came 
about  that  the  book  was  very  unfairly  attributed 
more  to  me  than  to  Mr.  Denny. 

During  the  year  1895  things  moved  apace.  It 
seemed  no  small  matter  that  Mgr.  Gasparri,  pro- 
fessor of  Canon  Law  at  Paris,  took  up  our  question. 
He  had  published,  two  years  earlier,  a  solid  treatise 
on  the  whole  theory  and  practice  of  Ordination, 
in  which  he  had  dismissed  with  even  more  than 


6      A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

ordinary  lightness  the  claims  of  the  English  Church 
to  possess  a  valid  ministry.  We  made  much  use 
of  his  work  in  writing  De  Hierarchia,  and  did 
not  fail  to  comment  on  his  deplorable  treatment 
of  our  own  question.  This  brought  other  critics 
upon  him,  and  he  took  chastisement  in  the  most 
cheerful  spirit,  freely  confessing  ignorance  of  a 
matter  lying  outside  his  own  province,  and  making 
serious  efforts  to  retrieve  his  mistake.  Visiting 
Rome  in  the  month  of  April,  he  reported  that  he 
had  brought  our  book  under  the  notice  of  certain 
Cardinals  who  were  intending  to  study  the  ques- 
tion, and  gave  the  first  warning  that  much  more 
would  turn  upon  the  rite  than  upon  historical 
circumstances.  From  this  time  onward  he  and 
M.  Boudinhon  worked  together,  not  agreeing  in  all 
details,  but  developing  in  the  main  the  same  argu- 
ment for  the  validity  of  the  English  Ordinations. 

In  April  appeared  the  Apostolic  Letter  Ad 
Anglos  of  Leo  XIII.  In  September  it  became 
known  that  the  Pope  was  resolved  to  open  up 
our  subject  to  the  fullest  investigation.  He  had 
demanded  and  received  from  the  Abbe*  Duchesne, 
from  Mgr.  Gasparri,  and  from  the  Jesuit  De 
Augustinis,  professor  in  the  Collegio  Romano, 
memoranda  which  were  more  or  less  favourable  to 
our  contention ;  how  favourable  the  last  of  them 
was  we  did  not  ourselves  know  until  a  later  day. 
There  was  activity  on  the  other  side,  Cardinal 
Vaughan  working  hard  in  a  way  not  fully  under- 
stood until  his  biography  by  Mr.  Snead-Cox  was 
published.  Dom  Gasquet  explored  the  Vatican 
Archives  and  produced  two  documents  of  con- 
siderable importance,  which  compelled  a  careful 


INTRODUCTION  7 

reconsideration  of  one  part  of  our  argument. 
In  December  M.  Portal  began  the  issue  of  the 
Revue  Anglo- Romaine,  with  a  benediction  from 
Cardinal  Bourret  and  an  imposing  list  of  con- 
tributors. It  was  a  heavy  task  to  keep  going  this 
weekly  review  of  forty-six  large  pages,  and  those 
of  us  who  shared  the  burden  had  some  desperate 
struggles — not  always  successful — with  the  printer's 
proofs.  It  lived  barely  one  year,  and  it  is  entombed 
in  three  massive  volumes  containing  a  remarkable 
body  of  original  articles  and  selected  documents. 
Policy,  and  human  weakness,  forbade  exclusive 
attention  to  a  single  subject,  and  its  pages  were 
lightened  or  burdened  by  various  displays  of 
irrelevant  erudition :  some  of  M.  Loisy's  earlier 
and  more  orthodox  essays  in  criticism  obtained 
a  narrow  publicity  by  its  means.  Gasparri  dealt 
with  our  own  special  question  in  a  couple  of 
masterly  articles,  written  and  published  before  he 
was  summoned  to  Rome  for  the  impending  Com- 
mission. Father  Puller  contributed  another.  One 
that  was  signed  with  mysterious  asterisks,  the  un- 
favourable conclusion  of  which  did  not  obscure 
its  friendly  tone,  fell  from  the  pen  of  a  learned 
Cardinal  resident  in  Rome.  I  wrote  on  a  subject 
in  regard  to  which  I  was  very  inadequately 
equipped,  and  yet  Duchesne  was  good  enough 
to  say  that  he  thought  I  had  made  out  a  fair 
case  for  the  contention  that  the  Popes  of  Rome 
and  Alexandria  —  possibly  also  the  Bishop  of 
Antioch — were  at  one  time  consecrated  with  im- 
position of  the  Gospel-text  in  place  of  the  impo- 
sition of  hands. 

These  labours  occupied  the  winter.     In  March 


8      A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

the  Commission  appointed  by  the  Pope  to  investigate 
the  question  assembled  in  Rome.  We  had  no 
communication  of  any  kind  with  De  Augustinis, 
and  knew  only  that  he  was  inclined  to  our  side. 
With  the  three  appointed  on  Cardinal  Vaughan's 
advice — Dom  Gasquet,  Canon  Moyes,  and  the 
Franciscan  Father  David  Fleming — we  had  been 
engaged  in  open  controversy,  and  with  one  of  them  I 
had  had  some  private  correspondence  of  no  import- 
ance. With  Mgr.  Gasparri  and  the  Abbe*  Duchesne 
we  had  closer  relations.  They  now  demanded  help 
in  detail.  Duchesne  was  drawn  to  Father  Puller, 
whose  full  and  accurate  erudition  was  exactly  of  the 
kind  that  commanded  his  confidence  ;  Gasparri  had 
been  in  communication  with  me  for  some  time, 
and  asked  me  to  keep  him  supplied  with  in- 
formation. 

The  result  was  that  Father  Puller  and  I  went  to 
Rome  to  give  the  help  desired.  Mr.  Snead-Cox 
has  said  in  his  Life  of  Cardinal  Vaughan1  that  we 
acted  with  one  side  of  the  Commission,  "  much  as 
solicitors  who  work  with  counsel."  That  is  partly 
true,  but  it  may  suggest  a  serious  falsehood.  We 
did  work  as  solicitors  work  when  instructing  counsel : 
we  supplied  information,  we  prompted  arguments, 
we  held  consultations.  But  we  were  not  solicitors  ; 
we  were  managing  the  affairs  of  no  clients ;  we  were 
promoters  of  no  cause  ;  we  had  engaged  no  advo- 
cates. To  suggest  that  we  were  so  employed  is  to 
revive  an  old  misunderstanding.  From  more  than 
one  side  we  were  represented  as  going  to  Rome 
with  a  petition  for  the  recognition  of  our  Orders. 
At  an  earlier  stage  of  the  movement  Cardinal 

1  Vol.  II.  p.  195. 


INTRODUCTION  9 

Vaughan  had  privately  written  of  "  Halifax  and 
his  party"  in  this  sense  :  "They  are  most  anxious 
to  get  some  kind  of  assurance  about  their  Orders, 
at  least  the  statement  that  they  are  possibly  valid !  "* 
A  more  complete  misconception  there  could  hardly 
be.  We  did  desire  a  favourable  decision  at  Rome  ; 
we  worked  for  it  and  we  prayed  for  it ;  but  we  did 
not  desire  it  for  our  own  assurance.  Nothing  of 
that  kind  was  needed.  What  we  desired,  what  we 
worked  for  and  prayed  for,  was  the  removal  of 
a  practical  obstruction  hindering  the  concord  of 
Christians.  It  was  not  on  our  side  alone  that  the 
need  of  this  relief  was  felt.  There  were  others, 
eager  advocates  of  Christian  union,  whose  efforts 
were  hampered  by  their  uncertainty  about  our 
Orders.  They  could  not  ignore,  as  we  could,  the 
practice  actually  current  in  the  Roman  Church. 
For  their  sake,  no  less  than  for  our  own,  the  ob- 
struction must,  if  possible,  be  demolished.  The 
Pope  was  willing  to  examine  the  obstruction. 
That  was  enough  for  us ;  we  would  give  our 
help.  It  was  not,  in  truth,  an  action  inter  partes  : 
there  were  no  petitioners,  no  respondents.  It 
was  an  investigation,  enjoined  by  the  Pope  on 
his  own  counsellors,  ad  informandam  conscientiam. 
We  worked  as  solicitors  work,  but  not  always.  It 
is  not  a  solicitor's  business  to  furnish  the  court  with 
evidence  that  tells  against  his  own  client :  he  leaves 
that  to  the  other  side.  Father  Puller  and  I  did 
furnish  the  Commission  with  some  evidence  that 
told  against  our  own  contention.  It  annoyed  us 
a  little  when  men  praised  us  for  this.  It  did  not 
seem  to  us  a  remarkably  virtuous  act.  We  were 

id.,  p.  182. 


io    A  ROMAN   DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

engaged  in  an  honest  investigation  and  we    could 
not  have  acted  otherwise. 

Yet  there  was  something  more  than  the  merely 
superficial  aspect  of  things  to  encourage  the  mis- 
conception of  which  I  complain.  Our  conduct  of 
the  argument  looked  that  way.  I  have  explained 
the  difficulty  which  I  had  in  entering  on  the 
argument,  the  necessity  of  looking  at  things  from 
a  standpoint  that  was  not  my  own.  I  forced  myself 
to  do  this,  with  so  much  success  that  for  two  years 
or  more  the  alien  standpoint  became  habitual  to 
me.  Father  Puller  was  made  of  sterner  stuff. 
Portal  used  to  introduce  him  at  Rome  as  "un 
Anglican  intransigeant ; "  he  would  then  put  me 
forward  as  "  M.  Lacey — qui  transige."  That  was 
a  pleasantry,  but  there  was  some  truth  in  it.  We 
were  agreed  in  this,  that  it  was  useless  to  put 
before  the  Papal  Commissioners  arguments  which 
would  carry  no  weight  with  those  to  whom  they 
were  addressed. 

This  difficulty  may  call  for  some  further  explana- 
tion. How  can  the  validity  of  an  ordination  be 
discussed  ?  There  are  two  ways.  There  may  be  a 
question  about  the  due  and  proper  use  of  an  acknow- 
ledged rite.  Such  questions  not  infrequently  arise 
in  the  administration  of  the  Roman  rites  of  Ordina- 
tion, which  are  so  intricate  in  themselves,  and 
so  hedged  about  by  judicial  decisions  and  theological 
opinions,  that  mistakes  may  easily  be  made  calling 
for  conditional  or  even  unconditional  repetitions  of 
an  ordination.  Mgr.  Gasparri  was  a  consummate 
expert  in  questions  of  this  kind.  There  is  a  question 
of  another  kind  concerning  the  general  validity  of 
Orders  conferred  by  a  doubtful  rite  or  under 


INTRODUCTION  n 

doubtful  conditions.  That  was  the  question  as 
presented  to  the  Commission.  How  is  such  a 
question  to  be  discussed  ? 

There  is  only  one  way  in  which  the  value  of  a 
mode  of  ordination  can  be  determined.  It  is  deter- 
mined by  the  practice  of  the  Church.  The  matter 
must  be  considered  on  the  Catholic  hypothesis  ;  and 
the  Catholic  hypothesis,  in  its  simplest  form,  is  that 
Holy  Order  is  a  gift  of  God,  conferred  by  means  of  the 
ministry  of  the  Church.  But  there  is  no  prescribed 
form  of  this  ministration  having  divine  authority, 
or  even  human  authority  of  an  exclusive  and  im- 
mutable character.  The  ordinary  baptismal  formula 
is  taken  to  be  of  this  kind — even  though  Nicholas  I 
did  seem  to  acknowledge  baptism  "  in  the  Name 
of  Christ "  as  sufficient — and  therefore  the  validity 
of  a  baptismal  rite  is  easily  determined.  There  is 
no  corresponding  formula  for  ordination.  What, 
then,  is  the  warrant  for  Holy  Orders  ?  It  is  found 
in  the  mere  fact  that  they  are  conferred  by  the 
Church.  The  Church,  by  the  hand  of  a  qualified 
minister,  ordains  a  man  ;  therefore  he  is  duly 
ordained.  There  is  no  prescribed  form.  On  the 
hypothesis  of  the  fundamental  equality  of  bishops, 
any  diocesan  bishop  can  validly  ordain  in  any  form 
which  he  chooses  to  employ.  Innocent  IV,  in  the 
days  when  he  was  no  more  than  a  prominent 
canonist,  expressed  the  opinion  that  in  default  of 
any  direction  from  a  superior  authority  it  might  be 
sufficient  for  a  bishop  to  lay  his  hand  on  a  candi- 
date's head,  saying  "  Sis  sacerdos,"  a  form  which 
would  be  equally  appropriate  for  the  inauguration 
of  a  Flamen  Dialis.  In  the  case  of  a  mere  eccentri- 
city like  this  there  might  be  room  for  doubt,  but 


12     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

such  flights  of  fancy  are  of  only  academic  interest ; 
bishops  do  not  indulge  in  them.  With  all  freedom 
of  action,  a  freedom  for  many  ages  almost  untram- 
melled, they  have  adhered  to  certain  general  lines 
of  ritual  in  ordination.  But  in  the  absence  of  any 
prescribed  form,  and  of  any  appointed  standard  of 
sufficiency,  it  is  impossible  to  mark  out  narrow 
limits  of  variation.  Any  rite  seriously  used  by  a 
bishop  of  the  Catholic  Church,  with  the  grave  in- 
tention of  perpetuating  the  sacred  ministry  as  it  has 
come  down  from  apostolic  times,  may  be  taken  as 
adequate.  But  he  must  be  a  bishop  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  The  same  assurance  will  not  wait  upon 
the  action  of  a  bishop  standing  apart  in  isolation,  or 
attached  to  a  notoriously  heretical  community.  On 
this  head,  if  the  matter  be  regarded  from  the  stand- 
point of  those  allowing  the  full  claims  of  the  Papacy, 
there  is  a  sharp  distinction  to  be  observed ;  those 
bishops  only  who  are  in  communion  with  Rome 
will  then  be  regarded  as  belonging  to  the  Catholic 
Church  ;  a  form  of  ordination  used  by  one  of  them 
with  the  Pope's  consent,  express  or  implied,  is  a 
form  used  in  the  Church,  and  is  therefore  of  un- 
questionable validity ;  another  form  used  by  a 
bishop  not  in  communion  with  Rome  may  be  valid, 
but  has  no  warrant  in  itself  arising  out  of  that  use  ; 
it  must  be  examined  by  reference  to  the  standard 
of  Roman  practice. 

Now,  what  was  our  position  ?  We  believe  the 
Church  of  England  to  be  an  integral  part  of  the 
Catholic  Church  of  Christ.  We  therefore  as  a 
matter  of  course  believe  our  Orders,  received 
in  that  Church,  to  be  valid.  There  can  be  no 
general  question.  There  may  be  an  individual 


INTRODUCTION  13 

doubt  whether  a  particular  person  has  been  properly 
ordained,  but  there  can  be  no  question  of  the 
sufficiency  of  the  ritual  commonly  used.  It  is  used 
by  the  Church,  and  that  is  conclusive.  Neither  are 
we  to  be  troubled  by  obscure  historical  difficulties 
in  proving  the  transmission  of  Orders.  We  are 
affected  neither  by  Macaulay's  challenge  to  prove 
the  direct  Apostolic  descent  of  any  one  bishop  in 
Christendom,  nor  by  a  lack  of  documentary  evidence 
concerning  a  particular  bishop  here  and  there.  Belief 
in  the  Church  implies  belief  that  God's  providence 
will  guard  what  is  necessary,  and  that  God's  grace 
is  large  enough  to  cover  unknown  accidents.  With- 
out this  assurance  sacraments  would  be  mere  traps 
for  the  unwary.  We  have  this  assurance,  and 
we  are  untroubled. 

But  the  canonists  and  theologians  with  whom  we 
were  working  did  not  share  this  assurance.  On  the 
contrary,  they  were  convinced  that  the  English 
Church,  whatever  might  be  said  in  its  favour,  was 
in  a  state  of  schism,  and  that  the  English  Ordinal 
had  been  brought  into  use  by  schismatic  bishops. 
The  validity  of  the  rite,  therefore,  could  not  be 
assumed  ;  it  was  not  to  be  regarded  as  prima  facie 
a  rite  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Even  if  there  were 
no  presumption  against  it,  there  must  be  a  strict 
examination  of  its  merits.  It  might  prove  good  : 
other  rites  of  Ordination  used  by  schismatics  and 
heretics  had  been  allowed  by  the  judgment  of  the 
Church,  and  so  might  this.  But  how  was  it  to 
be  examined  ?  To  what  standard  should  it  be 
brought  ?  There  was  only  one  answer.  It  must  be 
compared  with  other  rites  allowed  by  the  Church  ; 
if  it  agreed  sufficiently  with  them,  it  could  be 


i4     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

declared  valid ;  if  not,   there  was  another  conclu- 
sion. 

To  this  examination  Monsignor  Gasparri  and 
M.  Boudinhon  addressed  themselves  with  all  the 
precise  and  verbal  accuracy  of  experienced  canon- 
ists. They  collected  all  the  rites  of  Ordination 
which  churches  in  communion  with  Rome  are 
known  to  have  used.  It  is  obvious  that  nothing 
which  is  absent  from  any  one  of  these  can  be  con- 
sidered essential.  When  everything  that  is  peculiar 
to  one  or  more  of  them  has  been  set  aside,  there 
remains  a  residue  common  to  all.  Nothing  more 
than  this  can  be  considered  essential.  Does  the 
English  rite,  then,  contain  what  is  found  in  this 
common  residue?  If  so,  it  suffices. 

The  weakness  of  this  method,  as  seen  from  our 
point  of  view,  is  obvious.  It  assumes  that  the 
English  Church  is  not  a  part  of  the  Catholic  Church 
of  Christ,  but  an  alien  body  to  be  judged  by  com- 
parison with  the  true  fold.  If  we  were  using  the 
method,  we  should  have  to  include  the  English  rite 
along  with  the  Latin,  the  Greek,  the  Nestorian,  and 
the  Coptic,  among  those  collated  for  the  purpose 
of  finding  a  standard.  It  could  not  be  brought  to 
the  standard  for  judgment :  it  would  itself  form  part 
of  the  standard.  I  sometimes  pointed  this  out  to 
our  friends,  only  to  be  put  off  with  a  polite  smile. 
In  truth,  since  we  had  undertaken  the  task  of  con- 
vincing the  Roman  authorities  on  their  own  ground, 
we  were  obliged  to  argue  as  if  the  English  Church 
were  schismatic.  We  were  consequently  in  a  false 
position  ;  we  probably  conveyed  a  false  impression  ; 
we  probably  caused  some  searching  of  hearts  among 
our  own  people  ;  we  were  probably  not  unaffected 


INTRODUCTION  15 

ourselves.  I  can  say  for  myself  that,  after  facing 
this  way  for  more  than  two  years  of  continual 
debate,  I  had  to  get  back  with  something  like  a 
wrench  to  my  true  orientation. 

Our  friends  and  opponents  are  not  to  be  blamed 
for  adopting  this  method.  I  do  not  know  how  else 
they  could  have  acted  ;  and  I  would  point  out  that 
we  should  be  obliged  to  use  the  same  method  in 

o 

similar  circumstances.  Let  it  be  supposed — a  not 
improbable  supposition — that  the  authorities  of  the 
English  Church  have  to  decide  whether  they  will 
accept  as  valid  the  ministry  of  the  Swedish  Church. 
If  they  hold  the  Swedish  Church  to  have  been 
throughout  the  last  four  centuries  an  integral  part 
of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ,  then  cadet  qucestio : 
the  Swedish  Ordinations  will  be  Ordinations  of 
the  Catholic  Church.1  If,  on  the  contrary,  they 
hold  that  the  Swedish  Church  has  been  schismatic 
or  of  doubtful  orthodoxy,  it  will  be  necessary  to 
inquire  whether  a  genuine  ministry  has  been  pre- 
served ;  and  this  can  hardly  be  done  without 
ascertaining,  among  other  things,  whether  the 
Swedish  rites  of  Ordination  are  sufficiently  in 
agreement  with  other  rites,  including  our  own,  to 
be  warrant  of  a  genuine  episcopate  and  priesthood. 
For  such  practical  purposes  the  method  seems  to 
be  imposed. 

But  I  am  now  concerned  to  point  out  a  more 
serious  flaw  that  vitiates  the  method  if  it  be  pushed 
beyond  its  proper  limits.  It  was  only  by  using 
it  and  testing  it  that  I  became  aware  of  this,  and 

1  It  is  obvious  that  the  general  treatment  of  the  subject  of  Holy 
Order  will  have  to  be  considered  inter  alia  in  determining  the  ques- 
tion whether  the  Church  under  review  be  orthodox  or  not. 


1 6     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

the  fruit  of  such  wearisome  labour  should  have  some 
value.  A  first  essay  of  criticism  is  contained  in 
this  volume.  In  the  course  of  a  lecture  delivered 
at  Sion  College  in  November,  1896,  I  showed  the 
precariousness  of  the  method  as  used  by  M.  Bou- 
dinhon.  From  a  comparison  of  rites  he  concluded 
that  a  certain  thing  was  necessary  in  the  ordination 
of  deacons.  I  sprang  upon  him  the  Canons  of 
Hippolytus,  in  which  was  a  form  for  the  ordination 
of  a  deacon  lacking  that  very  thing.  At  that  time 
those  Canons  were  commonly  supposed  to  be  an 
authentic  Roman  document  of  the  third  century  ; 
M.  Boudinhon  at  once  bowed  to  their  authority,  and 
varied  his  judgment  on  the  essentials  of  diaconal 
Ordination.  An  acute  critic  afterwards  showed  the 
particular  instance  to  be  faulty  ;  but,  as  illustrating  a 
defect  of  method,  the  incident  retains  its  value. 
M.  Boudinhon's  previous  conclusion  had  been  based 
on  imperfect  evidence.  But  the  evidence  will 
always  be  imperfect.  It  can  never  be  known  that 
all  the  rites  used  in  the  Church  from  the  beginning 
have  been  ascertained  and  collated.  It  is  safe  to 
infer  the  validity  of  a  rite  from  its  agreement  with 
the  common  element  in  the  known  rites  of  the 
Church,  but  it  is  not  safe  to  pronounce  a  rite  invalid 
for  lack  of  this  agreement :  there  may  have  been  a 
rite  of  the  Church,  now  forgotten,  with  which  it 
would  agree.  Imposition  of  hands  appears  to  be 
a  common  element  in  all  the  known  rites  of  Ordina- 
tion ;  but  if  I  was  right  in  my  contention  that  the 
bishops  of  Rome  and  Alexandria  were  at  one  time 
consecrated  without  imposition  of  hands,  it  would 
be  impossible  to  pronounce  ordinations  certainly 
invalid  for  lack  of  that  ceremony.  Thus  the 


INTRODUCTION  17 

method  may  establish  the  adequacy  of  a  rite,  but 
can  never  establish  its  inadequacy.  The  argument 
may  be  used  dialectically  to  demonstrate  the  neces- 
sity of  acknowledging  certain  ordinations  ;  it  cannot 
be  used  for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  abstract 
essentials  of  Ordination,  and  therefore  it  cannot 
be  pressed  in  the  negative  sense  to  the  exclusion 
of  any  rite  as  defective.  Mgr.  Gasparri  and  M. 
Boudinhon  did  not  always  observe  this  limitation, 
and  others  less  wary  have  ignored  it  to  their  logical 
undoing. 

We  then  could  use  this  argument  dialectically, 
and  be  unaffected  by  any  failure  to  convince  those 
to  whom  it  was  addressed.  We  were  not  solicitors, 
but  we  were  in  a  sense  advocates.  Certain  theolo- 
gians were  urging  a  change  in  the  practice  of  the 
Roman  Church.  We  were  not  directly  concerned, 
for  we  had  no  intention  of  submitting  any  question 
about  our  own  ordination  to  the  judgment  of  Rome; 
but  for  the  general  good  of  the  Church  we  desired 
that  change,  and  we  therefore  joined  in  the  argu- 
ment. We  had  to  argue  on  the  ground  taken. 
It  was  with  justifiable  pride  that  I  received  from 
a  man  like  M.  Paul  Fabre  his  commendation  of  De 
Hierarchies:  "  C'est  une  e*tude  historique  ;  ce  n'est 
pas  un  plaidoyer ; "  but  in  one  way  he  was  wrong. 
We  tried  to  make  it  good  history,  but  it  was 
certainly  a  plea;  if  anyone,  by  an  allowed  misuse  of 
terms,  calls  it  a  piece  of  special  pleading,  I  shall  not 
complain.  We  were  bound  to  the  conditions  of 
the  argument ;  we  had  to  set  aside  our  own  convic- 
tions, and  argue  from  the  convictions  of  others. 

These  things  I  recall  in  reading  the  notes   that 
I   made  each   day  of  our    work   in    Rome,   and   I 


i8     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

no  longer  wonder  that  Father  Puller  and  I  were 
accused  of  putting  in  jeopardy  the  dignity  of  our 
own  priesthood.  It  was  a  risk  which  had  to  be  run. 
I  do  not  remember  any  consciousness  of  the  peril 
at  the  time,  but  I  look  back  and  understand  the 
generosity  which  impelled  Mr.  Gladstone  to  thank 
us  "for  undertaking  so  bravely  an  arduous  work." 

Another  charge  of  contrary  tenour  has  more 
recently  been  laid  against  us  and  those  who  were 
engaged  with  us.  We  have  been  accused  of  trying 
alternately  to  bully  and  to  cajole  the  Pope  into 
giving  a  decision  favourable  to  our  claims.  Our 
aim,  it  is  hinted,  was  to  frighten  him  by  represent- 
ing an  adverse  decision  as  fatal  to  hopes  of  union, 
so  that  he  should  at  the  worst  keep  silence.  The 
memorandum  with  which  Mr.  Gladstone  intervened 
was  "a  magnificent  bribe,"  an  attempt  to  move  the 
aged  Pontiff  by  holding  out  the  prospect  of  what 
was  nearest  to  his  heart — the  reconciliation  of 
England  to  the  Holy  See.  Is  there  any  founda- 
tion for  this  presentment  of  the  story?  How  it  is 
to  be  reconciled  with  the  supposition  that  we  were 
timorously  seeking  a  resolution  of  our  own  doubts, 
I  will  let  others  determine.  We  afforded  some 
grounds  for  that  charge ;  did  we  afford  any  for 
this  ?  I  think  we  did,  though  the  charge  can  easily 
be  rebutted.  Memory  and  the  written  records  alike 
tell  me  that  Father  Puller  and  I  adopted  an  attitude 
in  Rome  that  must  have  seemed  arrogant  to  those 
accustomed  to  another  manner.  We  certainly  had 
not  the  air  of  suppliants.  Both  the  "  Anglican 
intransigeant "  and  the  other  "qui  transigeait" 
spoke  very  plainly  of  the  effect  which  an  adverse 
decision  would  have.  It  was  useless,  we  said  again 


INTRODUCTION  19 

and  again,  to  talk  to  the  English  Church  about 
reconciliation  with  Rome  until  the  question  of  the 
Ordinations  was  settled  in  a  favourable  sense.  That 
might  be  a  very  short  step  towards  reconciliation, 
but  it  was  the  indispensable  first  step.  This  was 
specially  noticeable  in  the  latter  part  of  our  visit.  I 
am  still  puzzled  to  know  why  the  Cardinal  Secretary 
of  State  pressed  us  to  stay  in  Rome  when  the 
sessions  of  the  Commission  were  ended  ;  but  it  was 
evident  then,  as  now,  that  we  were  no  longer  to  be 
concerned  with  meticulous  inquiry  into  questions  of 
detail.  Something  else  was  required  of  us.  We 
found  that  we  were  expected  to  enlighten  some 
very  eminent  persons  whose  knowledge  of  English 
churchmanship  was  much  smaller  than  their  interest 
in  its  development.  We  made  no  secret  of  our 
independent  spirit ;  perhaps  we  made  unnecessary 
display  of  it.  Duchesne  may  have  thought  so. 
When  we  demurred  to  his  suggestion  that  we 
should  visit  various  Cardinals,  on  the  ground  of  our 

'  O 

lack  of  credentials  to  "les  grands,"  he  replied  in 
his  most  caustic  manner,  "  Mais  qui  y  a-t-il  a 
Rome  de  plus  grand  que  vous  ? "  I  was  very  much 
nettled,  and  made  no  note  of  the  remark  in  my 
Diary ;  I  can  remember  it  now  with  amusement. 
There  were  occasions  when  I,  at  all  events,  carried 
independence  of  demeanour  too  far.  My  insularity, 
my  more  than  transalpine  barbarity,  betrayed 
me  once  into  a  deplorable  breach  of  etiquette 
in  Cardinal  Rampolla's  antechamber.  I  tender 
belated  apologies  to  a  magnificent  person,  of  whose 
rank  and  station  I  am  ignorant,  but  whose  pained 
and  bewildered  expression  I  cannot  forget.  To 
a  certain  forcefulness  of  manner,  offensive  to  Italian 


20     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

taste,  I  plead  guilty  ;  I  do  not  acknowledge  any 
dream  of  enforcing  a  decision  by  a  suggestion 
of  politic  motives.  Our  only  object  was  to  lay  the 
truth  bare,  to  show  plainly  that  no  doubts  on 
the  matter  in  question  were  entertained  among  our- 
selves, and  to  leave  no  room  for  mistakes  about  the 
way  in  which  an  unfavourable  decision  would  be 
received.  If  Leo  XIII  was  deceived  on  this  head, 
the  fault  was  not  ours. 

The  one  incident  of  the  campaign  which  hurts 
me  in  retrospect  is  the  treatment  of  my  pamphlet, 
De  Re  Anglicana.  The  pamphlet  was,  on  the  face 
of  it,  a  partial  statement,  and  it  was  open  to  legiti- 
mate criticism.  I  could  have  borne  it  patiently  if  I 
had  been  told  that  I  saw  my  surroundings  in  too 
rosy  a  light,  that  my  optimism  deceived  me,  that 
my  knowledge  was  at  fault,  that  I  lacked  a  sense  of 
proportion,  or  even  that  I  was  carried  away  by  the 
spirit  of  party.  The  reply  would  have  been  obvi- 
ous, that  I  probably  knew  more  about  the  subject 
than  my  critics.  But  I  encountered  criticism  of 
another  sort.  In  a  secret  paper  I  was  accused  of 
deliberate  fraud,  of  saying  things  in  the  ears  of 
Cardinals  at  Rome  which  I  should  not  dare  to  say 
in  the  open  air  of  England.  It  was  a  charge  of 
conscious  and  intentional  falsehood,  and  it  was 
delivered  as  a  stab  in  the  dark.  The  calumny 
was  easily  answered  when  known.  My  pamphlet  was 
not  formally  published  or  put  on  sale,  but  a  hundred 
copies  were  printed  and  freely  circulated  not  only 
in  Rome,  but  also  in  England  and  America.  I  sent 
one,  as  a  matter  of  course,  to  my  own  bishop  at 
Ely.  As  soon  as  the  accusation  came  to  my  ears, 
and  before  it  was  made  public,  I  placed  others  at  the 


INTRODUCTION  21 

great  public  libraries  in  England.  It  was  myself, 
indeed,  who  made  the  accusation  public.  I  was 
angry,  and  I  retorted  in  kind  ;  more  fiercely,  per- 
haps, than  I  ought  to  have  done.  I  had  the 
less  right  to  be  angry,  as  I  now  see,  in  that  I 
had  nursed  similar  suspicions  and  made  similar 
charges  against  others.  This  volume  contains 
evidence  of  it.  I  would  gladly  forget  the 
whole  matter,  but  even  after  this  lapse  of 
years  I  cannot  pretend  to  be  anything  less  than 
indignant.  I  no  longer  suspect  my  critics  of  bad 
faith.  Doubtless  they  were,  like  me,  suffering  from 
nervous  tension.  But  the  facts  remain  :  the  docu- 
ments are  in  this  volume  ;  they  are  part  of  the 
record,  and  must  not  be  suppressed. 

When  I  read  my  Diary  with  the  deliberate 
judgment  of  a  later  day,  two  things  strike  me  as 
remarkable.  The  first  is  the  disproportionate 
attention  paid  by  the  Commission  to  unimportant 
points.  It  seems  to  be  all  about  Barlow.  We  were 
hardly  prepared  for  this,  and  much  work  had  to  be 
done  with  materials  not  in  hand.  In  dealing  with 
these  materials  I  made  one  bad  blunder,  which  is 
recorded  and  corrected  in  this  volume.  Father 
Puller  must  have  had  little  or  no  share  in  this,  as 
it  lay  in  a  department  where  I  usually  wearied 
myself  alone.  It  was  pure  weariness  :  only  those 
who  have  gone  through  the  whole  of  the  stupid 
business  about  Barlow  can  understand  the  futility  of 
the  objections  raised,  the  obscuring  of  a  clear  case 
by  needless  side  issues,  the  ruin  of  the  sense  of  pro- 
portion which  the  discussion  causes.  Lingard 
settled  the  matter  once  for  all,  with  his  broad 
common  sense  and  historic  perception  :  it  never 


22     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

should  have  been  moved  again.  It  was  threshed 
out  unmercifully  in  the  Commission  of  1896,  and 
I  make  bold  to  say  that  anyone  who  attempts  to 
stir  the  old  objections  again  should  be  held  convict 
of  dishonest  intent.  When  I  handed  to  Cardinal 
Mazzella  one  of  the  documents — that  about  which 
I  had  gone  astray — he  put  it  aside  with  the  remark 
that  it  was  of  no  importance.  This  was  unkind,  in 
view  of  the  trouble  we  had  taken  over  it,  but  it  was 
true.  The  documents  about  Barlow,  and  the 
absence  of  documents,  are  of  no  importance.  These 
arguments  are  for  the  dustbin. 

The  second  thing  that  strikes  me  is  the  dry  and 
jejune  character  of  my  notes.  I  put  this  down 
partly  to  fatigue.  Never  in  my  life  have  I  been  so 
hard  worked  as  during  those  two  months.  It 
should  be  remembered  that,  apart  from  the  labours 
of  the  Commission,  we  had  to  keep  going  the 
weekly  issue  of  the  Revue  Anglo- Romaine,  a  suffi- 
cient task  in  itself.  There  were  labours  of  transla- 
tion also,  the  most  irksome  of  employments.  The 
differing  genius  of  the  two  languages  became  pain- 
fully apparent  as  we  strove  to  render  into  French 
clarity  the  English  allusiveness  of  Newman,  the 
rich  imagery  of  Wiseman,  or  the  majestic  involu- 
tions of  Mr.  Gladstone's  mind.  We  had  some 
trouble  with  a  young  Lazarist,  helping  us  with 
Wiseman,  who  wanted  to  bring  the  Children  of 
Israel  into  conflict  with  "  des  Golias  "  during  their 
wandering  in  the  wilderness  ;  one  giant  was  as  good 
as  another  for  him,  but  we  could  not  allow  Wiseman 
to  be  represented  as  confusing  the  Anakim  with  the 
Philistines  of  Gath.  Our  method  of  translating 
Mr.  Gladstone's  Memorandum  is  not  to  be  re- 


INTRODUCTION  23 

commended.  Puller  and  I  first  rendered  it  into 
what  we  considered  to  be  French,  and  Portal  then 
revised  our  rendering  into  what  he  considered  to  be 
French.  The  difficulty  was  first  to  ascertain  the 
meaning  of  the  original,  and  then  to  find  some 
possible  way  of  expressing  that  meaning  in  French. 
"  Ca  ne  peut  pas  se  dire  en  fran^ais,"  Portal  would 
say  brusquely  and  despairingly.  Puller  and  I 
wrangled  for  twenty  minutes  over  the  meaning  of 
one  sentence.  I  then  gave  way,  not  because  I  was 
convinced,  but  because  I  was  the  younger.  Such 
were  our  labours. 

A  short  visit  to  Monte  Cassino  brought  welcome 
but  inadequate  respite.  The  note  in  my  Diary, 
"  Nightingale  singing  all  night,"  recalls  the  sleep- 
lessness of  fatigue,  which  beset  me  the  first  night 
that  we  spent  there.  I  was  up  at  my  window  con- 
stantly, until  the  purple  masses  of  the  engirdling 
mountains  were  outlined  in  gold.  Father  Puller 
called  me  from  a  passing  slumber  at  half-past  four 
to  go  to  Mattins ;  I  responded  with  alacrity,  just 
turned  over  once  on  my  bed,  and  found  him  stand- 
ing over  me  again  with  the  news  that  it  was  past 
eight  o'clock.  I  remember  the  listlessness  and  dis- 
taste with  which  I  made  some  few  visits  to  the 
usual  objects  of  interest  in  Rome.  In  such  great 
weariness,  a  degree  of  spiritual  dryness  and  a  certain 
shortness  of  temper  were  inevitable.  They  are 
reflected  in  the  Diary.  Moreover,  I  was  making 
only  notes  to  aid  my  memory.  I  should  not  like  it 
to  be  thought  that  any  of  those  engaged  in  our  work 
were  absorbed  in  externals  and  mindful  only  of  the 
machinery  of  the  Church.  I  kept  no  journal  intime 
of  aspirations,  of  hopes  and  prayers.  Nor  would 


24     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

it  be  seemly  to  enlarge  on  these  things  in  retrospect. 
I  will  recall  only  the  day  when  we  were  allowed  to 
attend  a  Mass  celebrated  by  M.  Portal  in  the  Crypt 
of  St.  Peter,  at  the  tomb  of  the  Apostle  ;  the  vision 
of  the  man  rapt  in  his  holy  office ;  the  burning 
words  of  faith  and  hope  which  he  addressed  in  a 
brief  discourse  to  the  worshippers.  But  for  this  I 
should  never  have  understood  the  deep  springs  of 
his  busy  activity. 

These  things  dwell  in  my  mind  more  than  dis- 
putations. My  memories  of  Rome  are  in  the 
main  relio-ious  memories.  I  love  the  Church  of 

O 

Rome,  and  I  do  not  know  that  my  love  has  been 
diminished  by  the  failure  of  efforts  that  were  made 
and  of  hopes  that  were  entertained  fourteen  years 
ago.  There  have  been  worse  rubs  since,  which 
leave  me  still  of  the  same  mind.  For  Rome  is 
various  ;  there  is  a  worst  to  be  known,  and  there 
is  a  best  that  hardly  can  be  known.  We  saw 
Leo  XIII  celebrate  Mass — with  what  tremulous 
devotion,  with  what  sense  of  the  unseen,  those 
who  remember  him  need  not  be  told.  A  minor 
prelate  of  the  Court  said  Mass  afterwards.  As 
we  descended  the  stairway,  I  heard  a  member 
of  a  religious  order  exclaim  :  "  Si  je  disais  ainsi 

la   Messe  devant  mon  superieur ! "     It  was  a 

faithful  son  of  Rome  who  said  that  things  would 
not  mend  until  four  Monsignori  had  been  hanged 
in  the  Campo  de'  Fieri  every  morning  for  a  con- 
siderable spell.  Having  made  the  acquaintance  of 
a  certain  distinguished  prelate,  I  may  myself  claim 
to  have  waded  in  some  of  the  deepest  waters  of 
Popery.  This  brilliant  churchman,  for  brilliant 
he  was,  enlarged  to  me  on  the  marvellous  elasticity 


INTRODUCTION  25 

of  the  Church  of  Rome,  her  power  of  utilizing  all 
that  is  great  and  good  in  human  nature  ;  she  could 
find  room  for  "  hommes  d'etat,  hommes  de  science, 
hommes  d'affaires,''  and  so  on  through  a  dozen 
categories.  A  minor  prelate,  who  was  sitting  by, 
softly  interjected  "hommes  de  vertu."  The  other 
laughed  lightly,  and  allowed  "hommes  de  vertu 
aussi,  evidemment ; "  but  I  could  tell  by  his  angry 
flush  that  the  shaft  went  deep.  When  I  asked  why 
Leo  XIII  tolerated  this  man,  whose  reputation  would 
spell  ruin  for  any  "homme  d'affaires,"  I  was  told 
that  he  would  not  willingly  quarrel  with  the  French 
Republic,  and  that  he  ran  some  risk  of  this  even 
by  refusing  to  make  the  man  a  Cardinal.  Here 
is  one  aspect  of  Rome.  There  is  another  aspect. 
I  shall  venture  to  repeat  what  I  wrote  soon  after 
the  death  of  George  Tyrrell.  I  had  accused  Rome 
of  breeding  heretics,  and  a  devout  soul,  a  simple 
Oblate  of  St.  Benedict,  answered  me  with  a  pas- 
sionate reference  to  "  that  holy  and  heavenly  faith 
which  is  the  soul  of  Rome,  and  her  very  self :  that 
faith  which  is  the  joy  and  consolation  of  her  count- 
less sons  and  daughters."  Tyrrell,  he  said,  in  this 
sense  died  within  Rome's  holy  pale.  I  allowed  the 
appeal,  and  explained  : — 

"  I  was  thinking  of  another  Rome,  a  Rome  which 
is  locally  situate  in  the  middle  part  of  Italy,  and 
which  thence  stretches  forth  tentacles  of  amazing 
grip — oh !  how  they  draw ! — the  Rome  of  saints 
and  martyrs  and  stupendous  sinners  ;  the  Rome  of 
Popes  and  Cardinals  and  Monsignori ;  the  Rome 
of  convents  and  bells,  of  colleges  and  schools ;  the 
Rome  of  scarlet-clad  seminarists  and  purple  pre- 
lates ;  the  Rome  of  the  Propaganda  and  of  the  Holy 


26     A  ROMAN   DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Office,  of  Curia  and  Basilica ;  the  Rome  of  Medici 
and  Farnese,  of  Consalvi  and  of  Antonelli ;  that 
labyrinth  of  history,  that  colluvies  gentium,  matron 
and  courtesan,  murderess  and  saver  of  men,  preacher 
of  righteousness  and  worker  of  iniquity,  sea  of 
grace  and  sink  of  corruption,  commixture  of  all 
contraries,  great  of  soul  and  immeasurably  small, 
scaling  heaven  and  stumbling  in  the  mire — the 
Church  of  Rome,  the  marvellous  work  of  God  and 
the  baffling  work  of  man.  This  it  is  that  breeds 
heretics  ;  and  no  wonder ! 

"  That  mystical  Rome,  that  hidden  soul,  which 
my  friend  the  Oblate  loves,  and  which  folded  the 
dying  Tyrrell  in  her  arms  while  the  other  Rome 
spat  and  cursed — this  Rome  lurks  in  the  narrow 
streets  beside  the  Tiber,  leads  about  priests  in 
shabby  cassocks  and  here  and  there  a  prelate  in 
glossy  mantle,  prompts  the  ragged  children  who 
say  their  prayers  at  San  Clemente,  guards  in  spot- 
less purity  the  cornette  of  the  daughter  of  St.  Vincent, 
sits  in  meditation  beside  the  shrine  of  San  Filippo, 
sometimes  slips  into  a  vacant  chair  at  a  Sacred 
Congregation  or  peeps  over  the  shoulder  of  a  Pope 
to  guide  his  pen,  is  always  active  somewhere,  sends 
out  messages  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  gathers 
in  devotions  from  all  lands.  This  also  is  great  and 
wonderful,  a  marvellous  work  of  God  and  a 
satisfying  work  of  man.  And  this  does  not  breed 
heretics." 


A   ROMAN   DIARY 


II 
A  ROMAN  DIARY 

1896.  March  20.  Letter  from  M.  Portal. 
Mgr.  Gasparri  and  Duchesne  are  nominated  by 
the  Pope  to  the  Commission  on  Anglican  Orders. 
Gasparri  asks  for  information.  Were  any  bishops, 
who  had  been  consecrated  according  to  the  Ordinal, 
afterwards  reconciled  by  Pole  ?  Was  Cranmer  con- 
secrated according  to  the  old  Pontifical  or  by  the  new 
Order  ?  It  would  be  well  for  me  to  go  to  Rome. 

March  22.  Letter  from  Lord  Halifax  in  the 
same  sense  and  inclosing  more  from  Portal.  Halifax 
wants  Father  Puller  and  me  to  go. 

March  25.  Up  to  town  on  Halifax's  invitation 
to  meet  Father  Puller,  Portal,  and  the  Archbishop 
of  York.  The  Archbishop  failed  us.  Knox  Little, 
Riley,  and  Birkbeck  also  present.  Father  Puller 
and  I  agreed  to  go. 

March  27.  Saw  the  Bishop  of  Ely  and  got  his 
consent  verbally.1  Letter  from  Halifax.  The  Arch- 
bishop of  York  has  consented  to  write  a  letter 
about  it  to  Portal,  which  he  may  show  in  the 
proper  quarters. 

Ap,  7.  Left  home  8  a.m.  Met  Puller  at 
Holborn  Viaduct  Station.  Started  for  Dover 
ii  a.m.  Calais,  Paris,  Dijon. 

1  I.e.  to  a  long  absence  from  my  parish.  See  Letters  of  March  27th 
and  3Oth,  and  of  April  loth. 

29 


30     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Ap.  8.  Through  Mt.  Cenis  tunnel.  Turin ; 
fine  view  of  Mt.  Blanc.  Genoa. 

Ap.  9.  Arrived  Rome  6. 1 5.  Portal  met  us  at 
station,  and  took  us  to  our  rooms  at  36  Via  del 
Tritone.  A  French  pension  au  quatrieme.  After- 
wards he  took  us  to  the  Lazarist  house  in  Via  di 
San  Nicola  da  Tolentino,  when  we  were  introduced 
to  the  Superior,  a  venerable  old  man  with  full 
white  beard,  Archbishop  in  partibus,  and  formerly 
Vicar  Apostolic  in  Persia,  Mgr.  Thomas.  After 
dejeuner  we  drove — still  with  Portal — to  St.  Peter's  ; 
thence  to  the  Farnese  Palace  to  see  Duchesne,  who 
lives  there  as  head  of  the  French  School,1  occupy- 
ing with  his  school  and  library  the  upper  story,  the 
first  floor  being  the  embassy.  He  asked  about  the 
quotation  from  Daniele  Barbaro  in  de  Hierarchia, 
not  being  able  to  find  it  in  the  Archivio  Veneto. 
I  explained  that  I  borrowed  the  reference  from 
Dom  Gasquet.  He  was  much  amused,  and  said 
he  would  challenge  Gasquet  on  the  subject.  I 
explained  to  him  about  the  book  of  Barlow's 
attacking  the  Protestants,  which  is  in  the  Cam- 
bridge University  Library.2  He  wished  to  have 
it  sent  at  once,  to  arrive  on  Monday.  Puller  talked 
much  with  him  about  Pope  Victor's  action  in  the 
Paschal  controversy.  Telegraphed  to  Wood  to 
send  the  copy  of  Barlow.  Afterwards  to  see 
Gasparri.  He  is  a  very  dark,  youthful-looking  man. 
Lives  on  the  fourth  story  of  a  dingy  house  in  the 
Via  della  Pace.  Salon  with  brick  floor ;  no  carpet 

1  The  "  £cole  de  Rome,"  or  Institute  of  Archaeology,  maintained 
by  the    French    Government,   of   which   he    had    been    appointed 
Director  in  1895. 

2  Since  published,  with  an  Introduction  by  the  Rev.  J.  R.   Lunn 
under  the  title  Bishop  Barlowe's  Dialoge. 


A   ROMAN    DIARY  31 

save  a  small  rug  by  the  sofa.  He  is  full  of  Ferrar's 
case.  The  enemy  are  maintaining  that  Ferrar  was 
consecrated  according  to  the  Ordinal,  in  order  to 
adduce  him  as  an  instance  of  a  bishop  consecrated 
by  the  Ordinal,  who  might  nevertheless  have  con- 
ferred minor  orders — an  instance  such  as  is  needed 
for  their  interpretation  of  the  Breve  Regimini  of 
Paul  IV. 

The  Commission  consists  of  Cardinal  Mazzella, 
president,  Dom  Gasquet,  Moyes,  and  a  certain 
Father  David  representing  one  side ;  Duchesne, 
Gasparri,  and  de  Augustinis  on  the  other  side, 
specially  appointed  by  the  Pope,  and  last  an  un- 
known Spaniard.1  Father  Scannell  also  has  been 
summoned. 

Ap,  10.  Mgr.  Gasparri  came  to  see  us  in  the 
morning,  with  two  questions  :  (i)  about  Ferrar's 
Consecration,  and  (2)  about  certain  Legatine  acts  of 
Pole's,  supposed  to  involve  the  invalidity  of  the 
Edwardine  Orders. 

(i)  Showed  him  the  text  of  the  Register,  and 
Estcourt's  discussion  of  it.  He  seized  the  point  at 
once,  that  the  Register  points  to  no  changes  in  the 
rite  of  consecration,  but  only  in  the  Mass  which 
followed.  We  found  that  according  to  Maskell  an 
episcopal  consecration  was  finished,  as  the  Register 
suggests,  antequam  Missa  celebraretur.  The 
interest  of  this  question  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  Commission  is  discussing  the  meaning  of  the 
Brief  of  Paul  IV,  Regimini.  The  Pope  spoke  of 
men  advanced  "ad  ordines  tarn  sacros  quam  non 
sacros  ab  episcopo  non  in  forma  Ecclesise  ordinato." 

1  He  was  sufficiently  well  known  as  a  theologian,  the  Capuchin 
Fr.  Josd  Calasanzio  de  Llevaneras,  afterwards  Cardinal. 


32     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Gasparri  asks  what  bishop  consecrated  by  the  new 
rite  ever  advanced  clerks  "ad  ordines  non  sacros." 
The  other  side  reply  Ferrar,  making  him  out  to 
have  been  consecrated  by  the  Ordinal. 

(2)  On  the  other  question  we  discussed  the  de- 
privation of  bishops,  and  degradation  a  solo 
presbyteratu.1 

Discovered  to-day  that  I  was  mistaken  about 
the  reference  to  Archivio  Veneto.  It  should  have 
been  Venetian  State  Papers.-  Wrote  to  Duchesne 
explaining. 

In  the  afternoon  drove  with  Portal  to  S.  Pietro  in 
Montorio  to  see  the  panorama  of  Rome,  and  after- 
wards walked  in  the  gardens  of  the  Villa  Pamphili 
Doria.  A  good  deal  of  talk  about  the  nature  of 
Excommunication.3 

Ap.  1 1.  Called  on  Gasparri  at  8.30  to  take  him  a 
copy  of  the  register  of  Ferrar's  consecration,  and  some 
notes.  The  session  of  the  Commission  at  10  a.m. 
Afterwards  I  walked  alone  to  Forum,  Colosseum, 
Campidoglio,  etc.,  and  was  strangely  unimpressed. 
Everything  seemed  so  very  familiar. 

Afternoon  :  Sir  Walter  Phillimore  called  on  us. 
Then  came  Duchesne,  bringing  two  Jesuit  fathers, 
Lapotre  and  another,  who  is  a  Bollandist.  Finally 

1  In  relation  to  the  statement  of  Foxe  and  others  that  Ridley, 
Ferrar,  and  Hooper  were  degraded  from  the  priesthood  only,  and  not 
from  the  Episcopate.     De  Hierarchia,^.  160,  seqq. 

2  An  extraordinary  mistake  in  De  Hierarchies,  p.  81  n.    I  think  one 
of  us  must  have  been  burrowing  in  the  Archivio  to  see  if  we  could 
find  anything  to  add  to  what  Mr.  Brown  had  calendared,  and  the  one 
title  was  substituted  for  the  other  in  our  note. 

3  Others  joined  us.     I  remember  one  remark.     A  certain  priest 
said,  "  II  faut  convenir  que  l'e"glise  de  Romene  retire  jamais  ce  qu'elle 
a  une  fois  dit."   I  replied,  "  Non,  elle  n'en  change  que  le  sens."    "  C'est 
ga,"  he  answered  eagerly,  and  then  seemed  to  wish  he  had  not  been 
quite  so  prompt. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  33 

came  Portal,  who  carried  off  us  and  Phillimore  to 
the  Villa  Medici  and  the  Pincio.  Duchesne  reported 
that  our  information  had  been  very  useful  at  the 
morning  session,  and  had  fully  established  the  fact 
that  Ferrar  was  consecrated  according  to  the 
Pontifical. 

Rather  over-tired  to-day :  too  much  walking. 

Ap.  12.  Low  Sunday.  Heard  Mass  sung  at  the 
German  college.  Beautiful  plain-chant :  Missa  de 
Angelis  :  very  dignified  and  reverent  ceremonial. 
One  of  the  young  Lazarists  accompanied  us.  After- 
wards went  with  Portal  to  call  on  Father  Scannell 
at  the  Collegio  Inglese,  he  having  left  cards  on  us 
the  previous  day.  Did  not  find  him  at  home. 
Looked  into  the  Pantheon  and  heard  Mass  at  noon. 
At  last  a  building  which  surpasses  all  expectation. 

Afternoon.  Duchesne  and  Gasparri  came  by 
appointment  and  we  did  three  hours'  hard  work 
investigating  the  cases  alleged  by  Moyes  as  show- 
ing that  Pole  rejected  the  Edwardine  Orders. 
Duchesne  is  satisfied  that  Pole  made  no  distinction 
between  the  men  ordained  by  the  two  rites,  but 
Gasparri  is  of  the  contrary  opinion. 

Afterwards  we  called  on  the  Oxenhams  in  the 
Piazza  del  Popolo. 

Ap.  13.  I  spent  the  morning  at  the  Biblioteca 
Nazionale  consulting  Wilkins'  Concilia :  found  that 
Pole  in  the  second  Legatine  Constitution  referred  to 
the  Decretum  ad  Armenos,  without,  however, 
quoting  it  in  full.  Hence  probably  the  mistake 
made  by  Dixon  in  his  History.1  From  this  copy 
of  Wilkins  all  the  pages  containing  the  Bull 

1  I  cannot  now  make  out  what  the  mistake  was.  See  Vol.  IV, 
p.  462. 

D 


34     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Regnans  in  excelsis,  except  the  first,  have  been 
removed.  Father  Puller  went  to  the  Vatican 
Library  and  found  the  Venetian  State  Papers  with 
Daniele  Barbaro's  report ;  also  verified,  in  Gairdner, 
the  letter  of  June  12,  1536,  in  which,  according  to 
Estcourt's  copy,  Barlow  was  called  "elect  of  St. 
Davye's  ;  "  but  in  Gairdner's  he  is  called  "  Bishop, 
then  elect  of  St.  Asaph,  now  of  St.  David's."1 

Afternoon  in  the  Biblioteca  Casanatense,  where 
I  looked  up  Degradation  in  Reiffenstuel.  Nothing 
much  to  the  purpose. 

Afterwards  a  long  discussion  with  Portal  on 
Unity,  planning  out  an  article  for  the  Revue  Anglo- 
Romaine. 

The  Secretary  to  the  Commission,  son  of  the 
Spanish  Ambassador  and  of  an  English  mother,  is 
very  fierce  against  us.  Mgr.  Merry  del  Val  his  name.2 

Calling  on  Gasparri  we  were  introduced  to  Father 
Scannell,  who  promised  to  go  with  us  to  the 
Catacomb  of  St.  Priscilla. 

Ap.  14.  Letter  from  E.  G.  W.,  enclosing  biblio- 
graphical account  of  Barlow's  Dialogue ;  character- 
istically complete.  The  first  edition,  published  in 
1531,  rather  too  early  to  be  of  much  service  to  us. 
Afterwards  I  went  to  the  Biblioteca  Nazionale, 
while  Father  Puller  translated  Wiseman's  letter 
with  Portal  for  the  Revue.  At  the  Biblioteca 
Nazionale  I  found  a  German- Latin  translation  of 
Pearson  on  the  Creed,  but  no  Hammond,  Field, 
or  Bilson,  no  Beveridge  except  the  defence  of  the 
Apostolic  Canons,  and  no  Barrow  except  the  Mathe- 
matical Treatises. 

1  See  below,  April  i7th,  and  Letters  of  April  I4th,  May  i8th  and  24th. 

2  Now  Cardinal  Secretary  of  State. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  35 

Afternoon  to  Catacomb  of  St.  Priscilla;  Duchesne, 
Portal,  Canon  Bright,  Scannell,  Father  Puller,  and  I.1 
All  came  to  tea  with  us  afterwards. 

Duchesne  reports  that  out  of  forty  cases  alleged 
by  Moyes,  in  which  Pole  or  those  acting  under  his 
authority  had  refused  to  recognise  the  Edwardine 
Orders,  he  has  demolished  thirty-eight  and  a  half. 
This  has  much  impressed  de  Augustinis. 

Ap.  15.  Gasparri  has  seen  Cardinal  Rampolla, 
spoken  about  us,  and  obtained  permission  to  show 
us  anything  and  consult  us.  Apparently  some  one 
had  been  objecting. 

Worked  most  of  the  day  at  the  article  on  Unity. 
Visited  S.  Ignazio  and  the  Minerva. 

At  dinner  a  young  Belgian  next  to  me,  M.  de 
Bossierre,  "  cameriere  segreto  di  spada  e  cappa " 
to  the  Pope.  He  was  educated  in  England,  and 
speaks  English  almost  perfectly.  Very  friendly, 
and  thought  he  could  get  permission  for  us  to  say 
Mass  at  the  Tomb  of  the  Apostles.  After  dinner 
we  had  him  in  to  tea  and  explained  our  position 
and  the  object  of  our  visit. 

1  I  must  add  something  from  memory.  Dr.  Bright,  who  lacked 
conversational  French,  leaned  on  Puller's  interpretation  of  Duchesne's 
interesting  disquisitions.  When  we  reached  the  resting  place  of 
Pope  Marcellinus,  on  whose  difficult  history  he  was  a  leading 
authority,  he  became  excited,  and  burst  into  a  disquisition  of  his 
own.  The  scene  rises  before  me :  the  low  vaulted  passage,  the 
smoking  tapers,  Bright's  wonderful  face  thrust  forward  over  Puller's 
shoulder,  the  pale  little  abbe"  standing  silent  in  resentful  astonish- 
ment, Scannell's  burly  form  shaking  with  suppressed  laughter. 
Duchesne  presently  whispered  to  me  :  "  Qui  est-ce  done  ?  "  I  thought 
he  knew  who  our  companion  was,  and  answered  simply,  "  Bright" 
"  Et  puis  ? "  he  asked,  raising  his  eyebrows.  I  explained,  with  some 
astonishment,  that  he  was  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  at 
Oxford.  "Ah!  Briecht.'"  exclaimed  Duchesne,  and  begged  for  an 
interpretation  of  the  discourse.  Suppose  the  name  to  be  German, 
long  drawn  out,  and  my  clumsy  phonetics  may  serve  their  turn. 


36     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

M.  Chabot,  a  French  priest  and  Lecturer  on 
Oriental  studies  at  the  Sorbonne,  called  with  Portal 
in  the  afternoon.  Also  Mr.  Oxenham. 

Ap.  1 6.  Visited  S.  Maria  Maggiore.  After- 
wards worked  at  my  article.  Dined  with  Sir 
Walter  Phillimore  at  the  Hotel  d'ltalie.  The 
Phillimores  are  occupying  the  rooms  which  the 
Marion  Crawfords  have  just  vacated. 

Ap.  17.  Worked  at  my  article  most  of  the 
day.  Father  Puller  heard  an  Armenian  Mass  at 
S.  Ignazio. 

Telegram  from  Father  Waggett  saying  that  the 
copy  of  the  letter  of  June  12,  1536,  in  the  Har- 
leian  collection,  which  Gairdner  refers  to,  agrees 
with  Estcourt's  copy  in  speaking  of  Barlow  as 
elect  of  St.  David's.1 

M.  Portal  saw  Cardinal  Rampolla  to-day,  and 
found  him  most  friendly,  but  he  avoided  speaking 
of  the  Archbishop  of  York's  letter. 

Puller  and  I  visited  St.  Peter's  in  the  afternoon  ; 
prayed  at  the  altar  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great. 
Observed  the  extraordinary  likeness  of  Alex- 
ander VII  (Chigi)  to  Napoleon  III.  Afterwards 
we  called  with  M.  Portal  on  the  Sceurs  de  Charite\ 

Ap.  1 8.  Visited  with  Puller  San  Lorenzo  Fuori. 
The  stone  on  which  he  was  martyred  shown  behind 
the  Confession.  The  tomb  of  Pius  IX  beyond. 

A.  S.  Barnes  left  his  card.  No  address.  Puller 
went  to  the  Benedictines  of  S.  Anselmo  in  their 
house  in  Bocca  di  Leone,  with  introduction  from 
Birkbeck,  and  obtained  permission  for  us  to  attend 
their  Mass  to-morrow. 

Sir  Walter   Phillimore  saw  Cardinal   Rampolla  ; 

a^  April  13. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  37 

half  an  hour's  conversation,  which  he  then  came 
and  reported  to  us.  N.B. — The  Cardinal  receives 
at  6  p.m.  The  Cardinal  was  rather  shy  of  speaking 
on  the  question  of  Orders,  but  called  attention  to  the 
impartiality  of  the  Commission.  Phillimore  spoke 
of  the  growing  desire  for  union — of  the  English 
Church  Union — of  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  and  his 
good  works  and  saintliness — of  the  Lincoln  trial 
and  the  Bishop's  refusal  to  plead  before  the  Privy 
Council.  Also  of  political  matters.  Dillon,  etc.  The 
Pope,  said  the  Cardinal,  had  put  pressure  on  Dillon 
to  keep  the  peace. 

Ap.  19.  Sunday.  Mass  at  the  Benedictines  in 
Bocca  di  Leone.  A  young  English  monk  from 
Ampleforth  looked  after  us  and  provided  us  with 
graduals  ;  Dom  Cuthbert  Mercer  by  name.  This  is 
a  house  of  the  congregation  of  Beuron,1  and  most 
of  the  monks  are  from  Maredsous.  They  sing  the 
Solesmes  chant,  with  much  less  precision  than  at 
the  German  College,  where  it  seems  the  Ratisbon 
books  are  used.  Terce  immediately  before  Mass,  Sext 
after,  both  said  sine  nota.  Terce  at  nine  o'clock. 

After  Mass  we  were  invited  to  an  interview  with 
the  Abbot  Primate  of  the  Benedictine  Order,  Dom 
Hemptinne,2  who  arrived  in  Rome  last  night.  He 
is  Flemish,  and  speaks  English  well.  A  long  and 
pleasant  conversation,  with  nothing  of  great  impor- 
tance. He  remarked  that  in  England  we  are  in 
some  respects  bolder  than  they,  e.g.  in  wearing  the 
clerical  habit. 

1  A  Benedictine  friend  tells  me  that  I  was  mistaken  here.     This 
house,  now  the  Convent  of  Sant'  Anselmo  sull'  Aventino,  does  not 
belong  to  any  special  congregation  of  the  Benedictine  Order,  but  is 
an  international  house  of  studies. 

2  Dom  Hildebrand  de  Hemptinne,  formerly  Abbot  of  Maredsous. 


38     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

At  an  early  Mass  at  San  Claudio,  where  the 
Blessed  Sacrament  is  continually  exposed,  I  saw  a 
priest  make  the  oblation  per  unum,  and  say  the 
Canon  after  Consecration  extensis  brachiis  in  modum 
Crucis. 

Afterwards  to  the  English  College,  where  Mass 
was  just  ending.  Scannell  showed  us  the  refectory 
and  library  :  found  Hammond's  Practical  Catechism 
there.  Discussed  with  Scannell  the  difference 
between  a  decision  allowing  Anglican  priests  to 
minister  in  the  Roman  Church,  and  one  admitting 
the  validity  of  our  Sacraments,  but  not  allowing 
ministrations  on  the  ground  of  praxis.  The  latter 
would  not  in  any  way  prove  a  barrier  to  re-union. 
Adversely  it  would  affect  converts  only,  with  whom 
we  have  no  concern.  Scannell  frankly  says  he  does 
not  believe  in  the  validity,  but  he  is  working  for  no 
decision  at  all. 

Afternoon,  Portal  came,  and  I  discussed  this 
same  point  with  him.  He  pointed  out  that  a 
decision  confirming  the  status  quo  would  be  mis- 
chievous, but  if  no  decision  at  all  is  given  no  harm 
is  done,  though  the  status  quo  is  maintained  in 
practice. 

At  three  o'clock  Duchesne,  with  his  friend  M. 
Fabre,  an  historian  of  merit,  Gasparri,  Sir  W. 
Phillimore,  and  Scannell  arrived.  A  long  discussion 
on  Barlow,  detailing  the  facts  about  the  absence 
of  evidence  and  the  arguments  of  Moyes  thereon. 
We  made  the  contention  that  of  all  the  instruments 
which  may  have  existed,  some  which  must  have 
existed  are  lost,  as  the  Cong£  d'dlire,1  Restitution, 
etc.  ;  the  disappearance  of  some  is  fully  accounted 

1  But  see  below,  April  z8th. 


A  ROMAN   DIARY  j9 

for,  e.g.  Barlow's  own  Register  and  the  Act  book 
of  the  Convent  of  Canterbury ;  there  remains  un- 
accounted for  only  the  memorandum  of  consecra- 
tion in  Cranmer's  Register.  Phillimore  was  very 
helpful  in  explaining  the  force  of  the  Act  regulating 
the  election,  etc.  He  holds  that  the  same  instru- 
ment must  have  ordered  both  confirmation  and 
consecration  ;  but  Barlow  was  confirmed ;  ergo  his 
consecration  was  ordered  by  the  king.1 

Lent  Scannell  de  Hierarchia,  and  Fr.  Sydney 
Smith's  pamphlet. 

Ap.  20.  With  Portal  we  visited  the  Sulpicians, 
and  had  a  long  and  interesting  conversation  with 
them,  the  whole  community  being  present.  M. 
Fabre  was  again  there,  and  M.  Fournier,  professor 
of  law  in  the  Institut  of  Grenoble. 

Ap,  21.  In  the  morning  Mgr.  Gasparri  came 
with  questions  about  Barlow — precedence  in  Parlia- 
ment and  such  like.  Mr.  Lunn's  copy  of  Barlow's 
Dialogue  arrived  with  many  notes.  He  explains 
some  of  the  answers  of  1540  by  supposing  that 
"  consecration  "  was  spoken  of  in  a  restricted  sense 
of  the  inunction.  We  looked  into  this,  going 
through  all  the  answers  as  given  in  Burnet.  The 

1  See  Letter  of  May  7th.  The  Act  provides  as  follows  :  "  The 
king's  Highness,  by  his  letters  patent  under  his  great  seal,  shall 
signifie  the  said  election,  if  it  be  to  the  dignity  of  a  bishop,  to 
the  archbishop  and  metropolitane  of  the  Province  where  the  see  of 
the  said  bishoprick  was  void,  if  the  see  of  the  said  archbishop  be  full 
and  not  void  :  and  if  it  be  void,  then  to  any  other  archbishop  within 
this  realm  or  in  any  other  the  king's  dominions  ;  requiring  and  com- 
manding such  archbishop,  to  whom  any  such  signification  shall  be 
made,  to  confirm  the  said  election,  and  to  invest  and  consecrate  the 
said  person  so  elected  to  the  office  and  dignity  that  he  is  elected  unto, 
and  to  give  and  use  to  him  all  such  benedictions,  ceremonies,  and 
other  things  requisite  for  the  same"  (25  Henry  VIII,  cap.  20).  See 
below,  May  I2th,  and  pp.  157-68. 


40     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

theory  seems  very  probable.  Many  of  the  doctors 
distinguish  consecration  and  ordination  cum  imposi- 
tione  manuum.  Others  say  that  consecration  is 
not  mentioned  in  Scripture,  but  only  appointment 
with  imposition  of  hands. 

A  ridiculous  book  arrived,  written  by  one  Dr. 
MacDevitt,  and  published  with  imprimatur  of  the 
Archbishop  of  Dublin.  He  gives  the  Nag's  Head 
fable  with  embellishments,  and  has  some  curious 
views  on  the  theology  of  Orders,  adopted  apparently 
as  telling  heavily  against  Anglican  Orders.  The 
significance  of  the  book  is  that  while  piling  up 
arguments  of  the  most  grotesque  kind  for  invalidity 
the  author  concludes  for  conditional  re-ordination, 
and  tries  to  make  out  that  this  is  the  existing 
practice. 

Ap.  22.  Heavy  rain  all  day.  I  found  that  some  of 
my  information  given  to  Gasparri  was  inexact,  and 
drew  up  a  memorandum  showing  that  the  king's 
mandate  for  confirmation  and  consecration  of  a 
simple  bishop  went  to  the  Archbishop  alone,  who 
must  then  proceed  according  to  jus  commune,  which 
moreover  had  just  been  confirmed  by  statute  (Act 
of  Submission  of  Clergy).  Therefore  Cranmer, 
having  received  the  Mandate  for  Skyp  and  again 
for  Bulkely,  had  to  see  that  he  was  consecrated  by 
three  true  bishops  according  to  jus  commune.  Neg- 
lect of  this  would  bring  him  and  all  concerned  under 
the  pains  of  praemunire. 

Gasparri  came  in  the  morning,  bringing  notes  of 
some  things  put  forward  by  Moyes  at  the  previous 
sitting  of  the  Commission.  Moyes  alleged  fourteen 
possible  documents  in  Barlow's  case,  nine  dealing 
with  appointment,  and  five  with  consecration.  All 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  41 

the  former,  he  said,  were  extant ;  all  the  latter 
wanting.  Moyes  now  gives  references  for  the 
extant  documents.  Among  them  are  the  Conge" 
efdlire,  and  the  Literce  certificatoricz  de  electione 
peracta.  For  these  he  gives  a  reference  to  the 
Patent  Rolls.  Referring  to  Moyes'  own  articles 
in  the  Tablet,  we  find  that  these  are  the  docu- 
ments relating  to  St.  Asaph.  Again  for  the  in- 
thronization  he  refers  to  the  well-known  private 
letter  of  John  Barlow  to  Cromwell,  alluding  to 
the  installation,  as  if  it  were  an  official  instru- 
ment. 

I  drafted  a  memorandum  showing  that  in  point 
of  fact  the  only  documents  extant  are  i°  those 
entered  in  Cranmer's  Register,1  and  2°  the  Concessio 
temporalium  ;  and  that  in  face  of  the  disappearance 
of  so  many  documents,  which  certainly  existed,  it  is 
impossible  to  infer  anything  from  the  absence  of 
some  others. 

Observed  and  showed  Gasparri  that  in  the 
Sarum  Pontifical  the  Consecrator  does  not  impose 
hands  at  the  Oratio  ad  instar  prcefationis,  but 
afterwards  at  the  prayer  Pater  Sancte,  omnipotens 
Deus. 

Afternoon,  we  and  Portal  went  to  see  Duchesne 
at  the  Farnese  Palace.  Told  him  of  our  discovery 
about  Moyes'  references.  He  was  very  amusing, 
full  of  stories  about  the  Commission  and  other 
things.  He  had  been  arguing  that  the  Bulls  both 
of  Julius  III  and  of  Paul  IV  were  favourable  to  us. 
Moyes  retorted  that  they  must  be  read  together 
and  were  then  unfavourable.  "  Then,"  said 
Duchesne,  "  put  them  together  and  there  is  one 

1  Inaccurate.     See  below,  April  28th,  and  further  developments. 


42     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Pope  for  you,  take  them  apart  and  there  are  two 
Popes  for  me." 


He  entrusted  to  us  the  Memoirs  of  Moyes  and  Co.1 
and  of  de  Augustinis,  and  his  own. 

Abstract  of  de  Augustinis,  written  in  Italian. 

1.  In  the  year   1684  no  papal  decision  against 
Anglican   Orders   had   been   given,    and  in 
1685  a  case  submitted  to  the  Holy   Office 
was  "  Dilata." 

2.  Gordon's  case  was  purely  personal,  and  the 
decision  was  not  grounded  on  his  Supplica. 

3.  The  Bull  and  Brief  of  Paul  IV  do  not  refer 

to  the  Anglican  rite. 

4.  Paul  IV  did  not  condemn  Cranmer  for  chang- 

ing the  essential  form  of  Orders.  He  had 
offended  only  sentiendo  et  docendo  against 
the  Sacrament  of  Order. 

5.  Men  ordained  according  to  the  Anglican  rite 
were  received  by  Pole  in  suis  ordinibus. 

6.  The    Nag's    Head    Fable    is    rubbish    and 

Parker's  Register  is  genuine. 

7.  Hodgekyn  validly  consecrated  Parker. 

8.  Barlow  was  unquestionably  a  true  Bishop. 

The  Rite. 

9.  Traditio  Instrumentorum  is  no  essential  part 
of  Ordination,  but  only  a  declaratory  cere- 
mony. 

1  I  regret  this  rudeness  of  style,  here  and  elsewhere. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  43 

10.  Council  of  Mainz  in    1549.      "In  collatione 

Ordinum,  quae  cum  impositione  manuum 
veluti  visibili  signo  traditur,  doceant  rite 
ordinatis  gratiam  divinitus  conferri,  qua  ad 
ecclesiastica  munera  rite  et  utiliter  exer- 
cenda  apti  et  idonei  efficiantur." 

11.  Council   of    Trent,    1562,   demonstrates  the 
sacramental  nature  of  Order  by  a  reference 
to  St.  Paul's  words,  "  Admoneo  te  ut  resus- 
cites  gratiam  Dei  quae  est  in  te  per  imposi- 
tionem  manuum  mearum." 

12.  The  form  in  the  Anglican  rite  must  not  be 
considered  to  be  theAccipe  Spiritum  Sanctum 
alone,  "ma  con  esse  si  congiunga  1'Orazione 
che  le  precede,  e  di  cui  esse  sono  quasi  la 
conclusione.     E    nella    Orazione  che   si   ha 
propriamente    la   forma   sacramentale    dell ' 
Ordine,  secondo  1'  insegnamento  della  Scrit- 
tura  e  della  Tradizione."1 

13.  He  analyses  the  rite  for  the  consecration  of 
a  Bishop  and  determines  that  the  Signum  is 
massimamente   determinate.      The    elect    is 
presented  to  be  consecrated  Bishop,  and  then 
prayer  is  made  that  the  heavenly  grace  may 
descend  on  him  so  that  as  Bishop  in  the 
Church,  and  according  to  God's  institution, 
he    may   serve    faithfully   to    the    glory    of 
God's    name    and    the    good   of   the    same 
Church. 

1  "  But  with  these  words  is  conjoined  the  Prayer  which  precedes 
them,  and  of  which  they  are  in  a  sense  the  conclusion.  The  sacra- 
mental form  of  Ordination  consists  properly  of  Prayer,  according  to 
the  teaching  of  Scripture  and  of  tradition." 


44     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

14.  The  concluding  words   about  the   spirit  of 
soberness,  etc.,   cannot  be  taken  to  destroy 
this  determination. 

15.  If,  juxta  communem  sententiam,   the   words 
Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum  alone  are  sufficient 
to   make   a    Bishop,   much    more   are   they 
sufficient  when  determined  as  in  the  English 
rite. 

1 6.  He  briefly  analyses  the  rite  for  the  ordina- 
tion of  Priests,  and  shows  that   it  contains 
the    necessary  sign,    namely,    imposition    of 
hands  with  a  corresponding  form,  and  this 
is    determined    by    the     concluding    words, 
"Whosesoever  sins,  etc.,"  by  the  preceding 
prayer,  and  by  the  general  drift  of  the  rite. 

Objections. 

1 7.  "  The  rite  was  drawn  up  and  introduced  by 
heretics,  with  an  heretical  intention,  therefore 
it  cannot  be  valid."     Answer:  If  it  contains 
a  sufficient  matter  and  form  the  intention  of 
the    compilers    is   of    no   account ;    for    the 
Arians    baptized   validly   though  they  used 
the   formula   with    heretical    intention,    and 
St.  Thomas  (3,  64,  9)  says  that  faith  is  not 
necessary  to  the  minister  of  a  Sacrament. 

1 8.  "The   Anglicans  have  corrupted  the  sacra- 
mental  rite  of  the  Church  ;  therefore  they 
confer  no  true  sacrament."     (Summa  Th.  3, 
60,   7,  ad  3.)     Answer :  They  have  altered 
only  accidentals,   not   essentials.     By  verba 
sacr amenta lia  St.  Thomas  means  the  form 
of  the  Sacrament. 


A  ROMAN   DIARY  45 

Intention  of  the  Minister. 

19.  It   is  not  required  that  the  Minister  should 
intend  to  produce  the  effect  or  end  of  the 
Sacrament.      Thus    a    man    who    does    not 
believe  that  a  Sacrament  confers  grace  or 
imprints  character  may  nevertheless  validly 
minister  the  Sacrament.    Quotes  Sum.  Theol. 
3,  64,  9,  ad  i,  and  10,  ad  3  ;  also  Bellarmine 
against  Tilman  and  Kemnitz  showing  that 
the   Council   of   Trent  required  not  that  a 
man  should  intend  "quod  ecclesia  intendit, 
sed  quod  ecclesia  facit." 

20.  He  takes  the  case  of  a  Bishop  saying,  "  I  do 
not  intend  to  ordain  you  to  be  sacrificing 
priests,"  and  shows  that  this  declaration  does 
not   destroy    the   intention  to  do  what  the 
Church  does.     "He  who  simply  wishes  and 
intends  to  ordain  a  priest,  in  spite  of  such  a 
declaration,  does  in  fact  ordain  him  as  he  is 
according  to  the  divine  power  conferred  on 
him — that  is  to  say,  with  the  power  of  offer- 
ing  the  holy  Sacrifice."     This   he   defends 
by   the  decree   of    the    Holy    Office   about 
Baptism  conferred  with  a  similar  declaration, 
18  December,  1872. 

21.  What  is  necessary  ?     "  To  constitute  ecclesi- 
astical ministers  by  a  sacred  rite,  and  to  do 
what  has  been  done  from  the  beginning  of 
the  Christian  Society." 

22.  The  expression  of  this  intention  is  found  in 

the  Preface  to  the  Ordinal,  and  is  illustrated 
by  various  extracts  from  the  rites. 


46     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

23.  "  Conchiudiamo  :  Le  Ordinazioni  anglicane, 
su  cui  non  ha  ancora  pronunziato  giudizio 
dottrinale  la  Santa  Sede,  sono  valide  per 
esser  fatte  da  Ministro  idoneo,  con  rito 
valido,  con  la  intenzione  di  fare  quel  che  fa 
la  Chiesa." l 

In  an  appendix  he  argues  that  Julius  III  ordered 
Pole  to  receive  those  ordained  by  the  Edwardine 
Ordinal  "non  servata  forma  Ecclesiae  consueta" 

We  have  also  Duchesne's  own  memoir.  He 
unkindly  refers  to  Gasparri  as  holding  to  the  Nag's 
Head  Fable  in  his  Tractatus  de  Sacra  Ordinatione. 

Here  is  a  gem :  "  Barlow,  pour  conformer  sa 
conduite  aux  idees  de  son  prince,  aurait  du,  non 
pas  se  refuser  a  1'ordination,  mais  se  la  faire 
confe'rer  par  Henri  VIII. 

"  Je  regrette  que  la  frivolite  des  objections  m'en- 
traine  a  des  observations  aussi  peu  graves." 

Duchesne  tells  how  he  used  with  great  effect  in 
the  Commission  an  argument  which  I  supplied  a 
few  days  ago.  Pole,  on  the  receipt  of  the  Brief 
Regimini,  must  have  verified  the  consecration  of  all 
bishops  promoted  during  the  Schism,  to  make  sure 
they  had  been  consecrated  in  forma  ecclesice,  in  order 
that  the  ordinations  they  had  performed  might 
stand  good.  In  doing  this  he  must  have  either 
verified  Barlow's  consecration,  or  found  that  he  was 
not  consecrated ;  and  in  the  latter  case  it  would 
certainly  have  been  heard  of.  Moyes  replied  that 
there  was  no  proof  that  Pole  did  so.  "  Then," 

1  "  We  conclude  :  The  English  Ordinations,  on  which  the  Holy 
See  has  not  yet  given  a  doctrinal  judgment,  are  valid  by  reason  of 
their  being  effected  by  a  competent  Minister,  with  a  valid  rite,  with 
the  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  does." 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  47 

said  Duchesne,  "  he  was  a  very  unfaithful  repre- 
sentative of  the  Pope." 

I  told  Duchesne  of  Mr.  Lunn's  suggestion  about 
the  Answers  of  1540.  He  was  much  struck  by  it, 
and  at  once  noticed  that  the  word  consecrare  is 
especially  used  in  the  Pontificals  in  connection  with 
the  anointing.  "  Consecrentur  istae  manus,"  etc. 

Ap.  23.  Visited  the  Sceurs  de  Charite  in  their 
house  in  the  Trastevere  maintained  by  Prince  Doria 
Pamphili. 

Ap.  24.  Mgr.  Gasparri  came  to  us  with  questions. 
Still  Barlow.  He  wished  to  establish  definitely  the 
fact  that  the  bishops  sit  in  the  House  of  Lords 
according  to  the  order  of  consecration. 

To-day  Gasparri  saw  the  Pope,  spoke  to  him  of 
the  help  we  were  rendering  and  our  attitude 
generally.  The  Pope  spoke  of  us  as  being  at  the 
door,  "  et  je  vais  1'ouvrir  a  deux  battants."1  The 
question  is,  What  does  that  really  mean  ? 

Barnes  called.  He  is  wearing  the  ecclesiastical 
habit,  but  has  taken  no  further  steps,  and  seems  to 
be  awaiting  anxiously  the  result  of  our  Commission. 
He  had  heard  gossip  about  a  speech  of  Lord 
Halifax,  in  which  he  said,  "If  an  adverse  decision 
be  given,  so  much  for  Rome  and  the  hopes  of 
reunion."  This  he  thought  unfortunate  language, 
as  it  would  go  straight  to  the  Pope.  It  is  a 
grotesque  rendering  of  Halifax's  words,  and  it  is 
apparently  being  put  in  circulation  here. 

We  visited  with  Portal  two  other  houses  of  the 
Sceurs  de  Charite — the  Ophthalmic  Hospital  below 
S.  Onofrio  maintained  by  Prince  Torlonia,  and  the 

1  Italian  was  presumably  spoken,  but  the  conversation  was  reported 
to  us  in  French. 


48     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Children's  Hospital,  "i  Bambini"  in  the  old  Convent 
of  S.  Onofrio.  Also  the  church,  with  Tasso's 
tomb,  and  a  beautiful  St.  Anne  of  Pinturicchio,  and 
in  the  convent  a  Lionardo. 

After  dinner  I  went  to  the  Farnese  to  restore 
Duchesne  his  copies  of  the  Memoirs,  and  had  a 
long  talk  with  him  about  the  possibilities  of  the 
Commission.  It  seems  that  the  actual  decision  of 
the  Holy  Office  in  Gordon's  case  was  based  not  on 
his  own  Supplica  at  all,  but  on  the  report  of  Genetti, 
or  even  on  a  direct  examination  of  the  rite.  They 
took  the  forma  essentialis  to  be  exclusively  the 
Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,  and  declared  this  insuffi- 
cient, on  the  express  ground  of  its  not  being  a 
prayer.  For  this  reason  Duchesne  thinks  it  is 
impossible  in  the  Commission  to  argue  in  favour  of 
the  validity  on  the  ground  of  this  form.  Only  the 
prayer  which  precedes  can  be  treated  as  the  form. 
In  the  presbyteral  ordination  he  is  himself  satisfied 
that  this  contains  a  prayer  for  the  ordinand,  but  it  is 
slight  and  obscure :  that  for  the  episcopate  is 
beyond  challenge.  We  spoke  of  the  practical 
difficulty  of  an  affirmative  decision  as  affecting  the 
internal  practice  of  the  Roman  Church.  Duchesne 
also  pointed  out  the  difficulty  of  deciding  dog- 
matically on  the  matter  and  form  when  the  Council 
of  Trent  had  declined  to  do  so.  I  suggested  that 
this  had  been  done  to  all  intents  and  purposes  by 
acknowledging  the  validity  of  the  Greek  rite.  He 
thought  a  practical  decision  might  be  come  to, 
saving  the  actual  praxis  by  requiring  conditional 
reordination,1  but  expressly  leaving  open  the  theo- 

1  "  I  cannot  understand,"  he  said,  "  why  you  should  object  to  this. 
It  is  no  more  than  your  own  St.  Chad  endured,  for  the  sake  of  peace." 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  49 

logical  question.  I  pressed  the  danger  of  any 
decision,  short  of  an  absolute  affirmative,  which 
could  even  be  represented  to  English  people  as 
final,  and  as  settling  the  terms  of  a  future  reconcilia- 
tion. We  cannot  ever  press  for  reunion  if  our 
people  are  made  to  think  that  it  would  involve  even 
conditional  reordination.  The  utmost  that  could  be 
made  tolerable  to  our  people  would  be  an  arrange- 
ment by  which  Anglican  priests,  wishing  to  exercise 
their  office  within  the  Roman  Church,  should  have 
to  undergo  some  sort  of  sanatio. 

MM.  Fabre  and  Fournier  then  arrived,  and  we 
drifted  into  a  most  animated  discussion  about  the 
origin  and  character  of  the  "  mouvement  centrali- 
sateur  "  of  the  ninth  century,  a  great  deal  of  which 
I  could  not  catch.  Duchesne  seems  to  think  that 
it  was  forced  on  the  Popes,  Leo  IV  alone  (or  with 
Nicholas  I)  actually  favouring  it. 


Ap.  25.  A  letter  from  Mr.  Gladstone  sent  on 
from  Lord  Halifax.  Writing  wonderfully  firm. 
He  will  write  for  the  Revue  an  article  on  the 
Armenians.  M.  Portal  has  seen  Cardinal  Rampolla 
again  to-day,  speaking  about  Mr.  Gladstone  among 
other  things. 

A  priest  of  the  diocese  of  Lyon,  opposite  to  us 
at  table,  who  was  amazed  to  see  us  eating  "  maigre  " 
yesterday,1  came  in  after  dinner  and  was  still  further 
astonished.  He  gave  us  many  particulars  of  the 
usages  still  prevailing  at  Lyon  :  e.g.  recitation  of 
the  Te  igitur  with  arms  extended  in  modum  cruets  ; 
the  oblation  per  unum ;  concelebration  by  five 

1  A  Rogation  Day,  not  observed  with  abstinence  at  Rome. 
E 


50     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

priests,  or  by  a  bishop  with  six  priests ;  position 
of  the  subdeacon  at  the  gate  of  the  choir  until 
after  the  Epistle. 

Ap.  26.  We  dined  with  the  Lazarists  at  noon. 
Afterwards  with  M.  Portal  to  San  Teodoro,  where 
was  Quarant'  ore.  The  "  Sacconi,"  a  noble  con- 
fraternity attached  to  the  church,  were  in  attendance, 
covered  from  head  to  foot  with  a  sack,  having  two 
holes  for  the  eyes. 

Mgr.  Gasparri  came,  reporting  that  Moyes 
declared  the  Conge"  and  Assent  for  Barlow  at 
St.  David's  were  in  the  Records.  Telegraphed 
to  E.G.W.  to  search. 

Ap.  27.  In  the  morning  went  to  the  Vatican 
Gardens  with  M.  de  Bossierre,  the  Bishop  of 
Bayonne  and  his  Grand  Vicaire  also  in  the 
company. 

In  the  afternoon  I  worked  in  the  Casanatense  on 
Launoy's  collection  of  definitions  of  the  Church. 

Afterwards  we  went  to  tea  with  Barnes.  Talk 
quite  colourless.  After  dinner  to  see  the  Pearkes 
at  57  Via  Sistina. 

In  the  sitting  of  the  Commission  on  Saturday 
N.  challenged  A.'s  statement  about  the  Barlow  docu- 
ments. B.  intervened,  declaring  that  he  had  seen 
the  documents.  "You  say  so?"  said  N.,  "Yes." 
"  I  believe  you,"  said  N.  with  a  little  emphasis.1 

Ap.  28.  Father  Puller  went  to  a  theological 
lecture  at  the  Minerva  with  the  young  Lazarists. 
I  to  the  Casanatense. 

1  This  petulance  was  quite  unjustified,  as  the  sequel  shows.  The 
documents  were  found,  as  noted  below,  and  there  was  no  cause  for 
any  reticence  about  them.  I  should  like  to  expunge  the  story,  as 
well  as  the  names,  but  it  would  not  be  fair  to  suppress  evidence  of  our 
own  suspicious  temper. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  51 

Afternoon.  Duchesne  and  M.  Fabre  came.  Du- 
chesne  afterwards  took  us  to  call  on  Cardinal 
Hohenlohe  at  Sta  Maria  Maggiore.  A  most 
pleasant  old  gentleman.  The  Revue  was  lying  on 
his  table. 

Telegram  from  Wood  explaining  the  mystery 
about  the  Barlow  documents.  The  Patent  Rolls 
contain  nothing  about  Barlow's  promotion  to 
St.  David's.  The  reference  given  by  Moyes  is 
for  St.  Asaph.  But  the  Privy  Seals  records  con- 
tain Conge"  and  Assent  for  St.  David's.1 

Both  of  us  to  the  Farnese  to  see  Duchesne  and 
report  on  telegram.  Fabre  and  Fournier  there. 
All  agree  that  the  discovery  does  not  much  help 
Moyes,  since  the  actual  instruments  are  missing, 
and  his  argument  requires  that  they  should  actu- 
ally be  found,  and  not  merely  evidence  of  their 
existence.2 

N.  stated  and  developed  the  thesis  that  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon  "a  fait  beaucoup  de  mal 
a  l'£glise."  What  is  called  Monophysitism  is, 
according  to  him,  only  an  Oriental  way  of  stating 
the  truth. 

Ap.  29.     Visited  the  Lateran. 

Ap.  30.  In  the  morning  Gasparri  came.  We 
could  not  get  anything  out  of  him  about  the  effect 
of  the  telegram  at  the  meeting  of  the  Commission 
yesterday. 

The  question  now  was  about  the  rite.     Was  it 

1  The    significance    of  this  last  was   not  yet   understood.     See 
below,  May  6th  and  I2th,  and  the  letter  of  April  2gth  to  W.H.F. 

2  This  was  unfair.     Canon  Moyes'  argument  required  nothing  of 
the  kind.     Moreover,  the  documents  in  the  Privy  Seals,  though  this 
we  did  not  understand  at  the  time,  to  all  intents  and  purposes  were 
the  instruments  in  question.     See  below,  pp.  153,  seqq. 


52     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

true,  as  recently  stated  in  the  Tablet  by  A.  G.  Clark, 
that  the  prayer,  "Almighty  God,  giver  of  all  good 
things,  etc.,"  in  the  rite  for  the  consecration  of 
Bishops,  was  sometimes  said  by  another  than  the 
Consecrator  ?  I  pointed  out  that  the  corresponding 
prayers  in  the  rites  for  diaconal  and  presbyteral 
ordination  since  1662  have  been  said  as  the  Collect 
of  the  Mass,  and  so  of  course  are  said  by  the 
ordaining  Bishop.  Formerly  they  were  said  after 
the  Litany,  as  is  still  the  case  in  the  consecration 
of  a  Bishop.  In  all  cases  the  rubrick  directs  the 
Bishop  or  the  Consecrator  to  say  the  Litany  with 
this  prayer.  But  is  this  rubrick  adhered  to  in 
practice  ? 

Our  impression  was  that  in  the  actual  practice, 
though  the  Litany  is  commonly  said  by  a  priest,  yet 
the  special  suffrage  and  the  prayer  in  question  are 
always  said  by  the  ordaining  or  consecrating 
Bishop. 

It  was  agreed  that  we  should  write  to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York,  now  at  Florence,  to  ask  for  infor- 
mation as  to  the  existing  practice. 

Gasparri  contends  that  these  prayers  are  unques- 
tionably sufficient  as  forms,  that  there  is  sufficient 
moral  union  between  them  and  the  imposition 
of  hands,  on  the  ground  of  the  unity  of  the  whole 
rite  as  maintained  by  De  Lugo  and  many  others, 
and  that,  therefore,  if  it  is  certain  that  they  are 
always  said  by  the  proper  Minister,  there  can  be  no 
question  as  to  the  validity  of  the  rite. 

Father  Puller  wrote  to  the  Archbishop. * 

M.   Portal  came   with   an  important  letter  from 
Lord  Halifax  about  Mr.  Gladstone.     Mr.  Gladstone 
1  See  below,  May  8. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  53 

is  quite  willing  under  certain  conditions,  e.g.  if  asked 
to  do  so,  to  write  a  letter  either  to  the  Pope  or 
to  any  one  else,  for  publication  at  an  opportune 
moment.  A  draft  of  a  letter  to  the  Pope,  on  which 
Lord  Halifax  and  Mr.  Gladstone  were  agreed,1  was 
enclosed.  We  talked  this  over.  M.  Portal  thought 
he  must  see  Cardinal  Rampolla  and  sound  him. 
But  he  would  put  it  that  Mr.  Gladstone  would 
certainly  do  something:  the  only  question  was 
what  ? 

He  waited  on  the  Cardinal  after  Ave  Maria,  and 
returned  to  us  about  half-past  nine  to  report.  The 
Cardinal  was  keenly  interested.  It  would  not 
do  for  Mr.  Gladstone  to  write  to  the  Holy  Father  a 
letter  intended  for  publication,  but  it  would  have 
a  good  effect  if  he  would  write  such  a  letter  to  some 
one  else ;  Lord  Halifax,  for  example.  To  the 
Abbe's  idea  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  coming  to  Rome 
he  would  not  commit  himself:  he  must  think  it 

over. 

*  *  *  #  # 

In  the  afternoon  we  went  to  the  new  Benedictine 
Convent  of  St.  Anselmo  on  the  Aventine,  by 
appointment  with  Dom  Janssens  the  Prior,  who 
showed  us  all  the  buildings  now  nearly  completed. 
A  significant  remark  fell  from  him.  Talking  of  the 
Abbate  Tosti  and  the  bad  odour  into  which  he  fell 
through  some  injudicious  remarks  upon  the  Roman 
question,  he  said,  "  The  relations  between  the 
Vatican  and  the  Government  make  a  very  difficult 
question."  It  is  plain  that  he  at  least  regards  it  as 
not  a  very  simple  one. 

1  This,  ray  impression  at  the  time,  was  incorrect.  [Marginal  note 
of  June  I2th,  1896.] 


54     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

May  i.  Father  Puller  found  at  the  Casanatense 
the  Acts  of  the  Council  of  Mainz  in  1549,  in  which 
the  matter  and  form  of  Order  are  treated  exactly  as 
in  the  English  Ordinal 1 :  for  a  priest  the  matter 
being  imposition  of  hands,  and  the  form,  "Accipe 
Spiritum  Sanctum,  quorum  remiseris,  etc."  More- 
over, this  is  spoken  of  as  occurring  at  the  beginning 
(principio)  of  the  rite.2 

This  is  interesting  either  as  ( i )  having  suggested 
the  arrangement  in  the  Ordinal  of  1550,  or  as 
(2)  evidence  of  contemporaneous  opinion. 

We  went  on  to  Gasparri  with  the  information, 
and  to  ask  where  a  copy  of  a  Mainz  Pontifical  can 
be  found.  He  could  give  no  information. 

In  the  evening  we  all  went  to  Duchesne's.  He 
was  as  amusing  as  usual.  He,  too,  thinks  this 
Council  of  Mainz  important.  He  could  only 
suggest  the  Vatican  Library  as  a  place  in  which 
to  find  the  Pontifical. 

He  described  the  procedure  in  Commission.  The 
Cardinal  President  puts  questions.  Gasparri,  being 
a  prelate,  speaks  first — and  generally  says  all  there 
is  to  be  said.  Then  come  the  seculars,  then  the 
Jesuit,  the  Benedictine,  and  the  Franciscans. 
N.'s  mode  of  arguing,  he  says,  is  exactly  like 
that  of  the  Donatists  in  the  great  conference  at 
Carthage,  which  Duchesne — alone  probably — has 
read  right  through  :  the  same  wearisome  insistence 
on  trivial  points,  the  same  determination  never 
to  acknowledge  a  mistake. 

1  It  is  a  curious  thing  that  at  the  time  neither  of  us  remembered 
reading  of  this  in  the  Memoir  of  De  Augustinis.     See  above,  p.  43. 
We  imagined  it  to  be  a  new  discovery.      I  am  not  sure  that  De 
Augustinis  brought  out  all  the  points. 

2  See  below,  pp.  187-92. 


A  ROMAN   DIARY  55 

Cardinal  Mazzella  speaks  English  perfectly,  and 
Gasparri  is  the  only  member  of  the  Commission 
who  cannot  read  it. 

May  2.  Father  Puller  went  to  the  Vatican  Library 
but  could  not  find  a  Mainz  Pontifical.  If  there  is 
one  at  all  it  is  in  the  Palatine  Library,  which  is  all 
in  confusion. 

Mr.  Crowe,  correspondent  of  the  Daily  Telegraph 
and  the  Tablet,  called  and  found  me  in  with  M. 
Portal,  and  tried  hard  to  get  some  matter  for  an 
article  on  the  Commission.  We  told  him  he  might 
safely  say  that  an  entirely  adverse  decision  is 
impossible,1  but  we  had  no  more  information  to 
give. 

Called  with  M.  Portal  in  the  afternoon  on  Mgr.  N. 
Duchesne  also  appeared.  Mgr.  N.  talked  freely 
about  the  personnel  of  the  Curia.  He  had  a  wild 
story  about  the  Pope's  brother,  Cardinal  Pecci,  hav- 
ing been  expelled  from  the  Society  of  Jesus  simply 
because  he  insisted  on  growing  his  beard.  He 
described  very  vividly  the  condition  of  the  Vatican 
on  the  night  of  the  Giordano  Bruno  demonstration  : 
cannon  loaded  in  the  Court  of  S.  Damasus,  every 
one  in  panic,  the  Pope  going  to  exposition  of  the 
Blessed  Sacrament  in  the  Sistine  Chapel,  and  say- 
ing "There  is  our  artillery."  He  had  much  to  say 
about  the  goodness  of  Cardinal  Galimberti,  though 
he  detests  his  policy — naturally,  as  being  a  French- 
man. The  Cardinal's  health  is  mending  to-day.2 

1  I  do  not  know  whether  he  used  this  valuable  information.     We 
honestly  believed  it  to  be  true. 

2  Our  friends   thought,    I   do  not  know  on    what   ground,   that 
Cardinal  Galimberti  would  be  a  mainstay  of  their  cause.     He  was 
Prefect  of  the  Congregation  for  the  Reunion  of  the  Churches.     Politi- 
cally, he  was  understood  to  favour  the  triple  alliance. 


56     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

May  3.  Holy  Cross  day  and  S^mday.  Went  to 
the  great  function  of  Sta  Croce  in  Gerusalemme. 
The  Cardinal  Vicar  celebrating.  The  great  altar 
standing  in  the  middle  of  the  transept  of  the  Basilica, 
people  thronging  almost  up  to  it ;  most  difficult  to 
find  room  to  kneel  down.  Picturesque  peasants 
and  little  children  were  skirmishing  in  front.  Round 
the  apse  sat  several  Trappist  monks *  mostly  wearing 
chasubles  over  their  habits,  some  with  cotta  also. 
Two  bishops  who  wore  copes  and  white  mitres. 
The  Cardinal  in  the  throne  of  the  apse,  a  bishop 
in  cope  assisting  at  the  throne,  a  prelate  in 
violet  cassock  and  cotta  acting  as  ceremoniarius. 
At  the  Credence  were  four  servants  in  livery  and 
gowns,  eight  boys  in  cottas,  looked  after  by  two 
men  also  in  cottas.  The  four  chaplains — clerk  of 
the  crosier,  of  the  book,  of  the  mitre,  and  of  the 
candle,  were  in  red  copes.  Terce  was  sung  by  the 
clergy  in  the  apse,  the  Cardinal  wearing  his  scarlet 
cappa  clausa  and  biretta.  He  was  then  vested,  and 
the  Mass  proceeded.  The  choir  was  in  a  tribune 
beside  the  altar.  The  effect  was  most  picturesque 
when  during  the  Gloria  and  Credo  the  Cardinal  sat 
in  his  throne,  and  the  four  chaplains  sat  on  the 
steps  below  him  wrapping  their  copes  about  them. 
At  the  offertory  three  members  of  some  confra- 
ternity in  strange  blue  habits  offered  a  candle  to  the 
Cardinal  on  the  throne.  One  of  the  small  boys 
drank  of  the  wine  and  water  before  it  was  offered. 
The  hand-washings  were  all  served  by  the  livery 
servants.  At  the  Sanctus  the  boys  brought  torches 

1  I  think  this  must  be  wrong.  There  was  once,  and  may  be  still, 
a  Cistercian  Convent  attached  to  the  Basilica,  but  probably  not  of  the 
reform  of  La  Trappe. 


A   ROMAN    DIARY  57 

and  knelt  on  the  nave  side  of  the  altar,  where  the 
incense  also  was  served.  The  choir  sang  the  Bene- 
dictus  actually  during  the  elevation.  The  whole 
ceremony  lasted  over  two  hours,  after  which  the 
Cardinal  went  up  to  a  tribune  high  in  the  transept 
and  made  ostension  of  the  relics.  No  attempt  was 
made  to  fence  the  people  in  any  way,  and  the 
thurifer  and  others  had  to  push  their  way  through 
to  get  to  and  from  the  Sacristy,  while  when  the 
Cardinal  and  the  Ministers  retired  a  narrow  lane 
was  made  for  them  to  pass  through. 

Father  Puller  received  a  letter  from  Frere l  giving 
account  of  certain  reordinations  by  Bonner,  and 
King  of  Oxford,  in  Mary's  reign,  before  the  arrival 
of  the  Legate.  There  is  no  indication  in  the 
registers  that  these  are  reordinations,  but  the  con- 
clusion is  arrived  at  by  noting  that  the  same  names 
appear  in  the  registers  as  ordained  between  1550 
and  1553.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  men 
ordained  during  these  years  who  retain  benefices 
without  any  mention  made  of  reordination.  Frere 
is  inclined  to  draw  the  inference  that  in  some  cases 
reordination  was  resorted  to  on  the  ground  of 
private  scruples,  but  that  there  was  no  settled 
policy. 

We  determined  to  place  this  evidence  at  once  in 
the  hands  of  Duchesne.  M.  Portal  came  with  a 
letter  from  Lord  Halifax,  saying  that  the  Bishop  of 
Stepney  was  sending  an  account  of  these  matters 

1  In  reply  to  one  written  by  him  on  April  27th  about  a  report 
which  had  reached  him  from  Mr.  Birkbeck.  He  wrote  :  "  If  you  have 
discovered  facts  which  prove  that  Bonner  did  repudiate  Edwardine 
Orders,  we  should  feel  bound  to  communicate  such  facts  to  our 
friends  on  the  Commission.  They  have  acted  so  very  loyally  towards 
us,  that,  besides  the  general  obligation  of  perfect  openness  in  such 
matters,  we  are  specially  bound  to  be  open  with  them." 


58     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

to  the  Times.  We  went  to  Duchesne's  ;  found  him 
not  at  home  ;  then  on  to  St.  Peter's,  where  was  a 
baptism.  Back  to  Duchesne's,  whom  we  now  found 
at  home,  very  tired  and  pining  for  some  mountain 
or  sea  air.  He  took  our  information  very  seriously. 

May  4.  Neither  Friday's  nor  Saturday's  Times 
has  the  Bishop  of  Stepney's  letter.  But  in  the 
latter  is  confirmation  of  the  report  that  the  Bishop 
of  Peterborough  is  to  go  to  Moscow,  appointed  by 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  with  the  consent  of 
the  Queen,  to  represent  the  Church  of  England  at 
the  Czar's  Coronation. 

We  called  on  Mgr.  Gasparri,  and  gave  him  a 
short  paper  which  I  have  drawn  up  respecting 
Frere's  information,  (i)  We  have  merely  identity 
of  names  in  the  registers,  nothing  to  show  clearly 
identity  of  persons,  (ii)  Some  ordained  by  the 
Edwardine  rite  are  shown  to  have  retained  their 
benefices,  no  mention  made  of  reordination ;  there- 
fore either  there  were  no  reordinations,  or  else 
different  cases  were  differently  treated,  (iii)  All 
was  done  before  the  coming  of  the  Legate,  and  by 
individual  Bishops — especially  Bonner.  But  Bonner 
rehabilitated  Scory :  therefore  he  either  reordained 
none,  or  treated  different  cases  differently. 

M.  Portal,  finding  that  Gasparri  knows  Mgr. 
Agliardi,  the  special  nuncio  for  the  Moscow  coro- 
nation (they  were  professors  together  at  the  Propa- 
ganda), told  him  about  the  Bishop  of  Peterborough's 
mission,  and  asked  him  to  speak  of  it  to  Mgr. 
Agliardi ;  it  would  be  a  good  thing  to  bring  them 
together  at  Moscow. 

Cardinal  Galimberti  in  a  very  serious  condition, 
with  little  or  no  prospect  of  recovery. 


A   ROMAN    DIARY  59 

May  5.  Morning,  I  went  to  the  Vatican  galleries 
with  the  two  Pearkes.  Afternoon,  Father  Puller 
and  I  to  the  Colosseum. 

May  6.  Went  to  Mass  at  St.  John  by  the 
Latin  Gate,  sung  by  the  Chapter  of  St.  John 
Lateran,  or  rather  for  them  by  a  small  and  very 
bad  choir.  Very  few  people  there.  The  floor  of 
the  church  was  strewn  with  leaves  of  box. 

After  breakfast  M.  Portal  came  with  important 
information.  The  Commission  will  probably  finish 
its  work  to-morrow,  meeting  again  only  once  next 
week  to  draw  up  the  proces-verbal.  They  hardly 
touch  at  all  on  the  question  of  intention,  merely 
stating  a  few  general  truths.  Apparently  things 
have  been  hurried.  All  graver  considerations  are 
to  be  reserved  for  another  Commission  of  Cardinals, 
either  of  the  Holy  Office,  or  that  of  the  Reunion 
of  the  Churches,  or  a  special  one  appointed  ad  hoc. 
Nothing  is  yet  known.  Mgr.  Gasparri  is  inclined 
to  raise  the  question  of  Baptism,  some  one  having 
described  a  careless  case  of  sprinkling  to  him  as  if 
typical.  He  will  probably  have  no  opportunity  of 
doing  this,  and  will  immediately  return  to  Paris. 
Duchesne,  he  added,  wished  to  see  us. 

We  went  on  to  the  Farnese.  Duchesne  had 
much  to  say.  We  must  on  no  account  leave  Rome 
when  the  Commission  is  finished.  The  report  will 
be  submitted  in  about  a  fortnight  to  the  Cardinals. 
Until  we  know  what  Cardinals,  nothing  can  be 
done.  He  described  various  Cardinals.  Rampolla, 
"  tres  saint  homme,"  bent  on  doing  all  he  can  to 
further  the  Pope's  policy,  but  likely  to  be  influenced 
theologically  by  Mazzella.  About  Mazzella  his 
mouth  is  shut.  He  has  learnt  what  he  knows  in 


60     A  ROMAN   DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

the  Commission,  and  so  can  say  nothing.  Galim- 
berti,  alas !  is  dying.  Another — name  I  forget — 
might  as  well  die  for  any  good  he  can  do. 


They  are  nearly  all  of  the  old  school.  They 
will  ask  what  is  the  intention  of  the  English 
Ordinal?  What  was  the  meaning  of  its  com- 
pilers ?  Either  heretical  opinions  or  the  change 
of  the  rite  alone  would  not  present  much  difficulty, 
but  the  combination  is  awkward.  We  must  be  on 
the  spot  to  meet  it.  After  all,  a  majority  of  the 
Cardinals  will  not  decide.  It  will  be  not  maior 
pars,  but  sanior pars.  Of  that  the  Pope  will  judge 
himself. 

He  pressed  us  to  go  at  once  to  see  Cardinal 
Mazzella  and  Father  de  Augustinis.  We  stuck  at  the 
former,  but  went  to  call  on  the  Jesuit.  He  received 
us  kindly,  and  was  very — Jesuit.  He  did  not  at  all 
know  why  we  were  in  Rome,  and  when  we  spoke 
of  the  Commission  seemed  doubtful  as  to  what 
commission  we  meant.  However  we  forced  the 
subject,  and  he  talked  a  little,  but  to  little  purpose. 
He  could  not  understand  why  so  much  is  made  of 
a  secondary  question  ;  the  main  question,  after  all, 
is  that  of  the  authority  of  the  Pope.  Yes,  I  said, 
but  secondary  questions  often  bar  the  way  to  the 
consideration  of  primary  ones.  Until  the  question 
of  Orders  is  out  of  the  way  we  can  hardly  get  our 
people  even  to  listen  to  talk  about  reunion. 

M.  Portal  went  to  Cardinal  Rampolla,  got  from 
him  a  definite  expression  of  a  wish  for  a  letter 
from  Mr.  Gladstone,  told  him  about  the  mission  of 
the  Bishop  of  Peterborough  to  Moscow  and  the 


A  ROMAN   DIARY  61 

probable  mission  of  certain  Russian  Bishops  to 
the  Lambeth  Conference  next  year.  The  Cardinal 
asked  very  kindly  after  us,  and  wanted  to  know 
if  we  had  produced  any  documents,  a  question 
which  enabled  M.  Portal  to  enlarge  on  our  prompt 
production  of  some  adverse  evidence,  with  which  he 
was  much  impressed. 

After  dinner  a  great  surprise.  A  telegram  from 
E.  G.  Wood,  saying  that  he  has  found  the  mandate 
to  consecrate  Barlow}-  We  all  went  straight  off 
to  Duchesne  with  the  telegram  for  him  to  produce 
at  the  Commission  to-morrow.  The  question  is, 
Where  has  it  been  found?  If  in  the  Privy  Seals, 
did  Moyes  know  of  it,  and  is  that  the  reason  why 
he  was  so  unwilling  to  give  the  reference  to  the 
Privy  Seals  for  the  Cong6  and  Assent  ? 2 

May  7.  By  the  first  post  came  a  copy  of  the 
Bishop  of  Stepney's  letter  to  the  Times,  under 
cover  of  one  from  Collins.  The  Bishop  had  written 
about  it  to  Cardinal  Vaughan,  who  at  once  asked 
for  a  copy,  which  was  sent  him. 


I  at  once  took  it  to  N.,  whom  I  found  at  work 
since  five  o'clock  preparing  his  votum.  Parts  of 
this  he  read  to  me.  He  also  asked  for  particulars 
of  what  the  Bishop  of  Peterborough  had  said  about 
Elizabeth's  reply  concerning  the  Council  of  Trent, 
and  I  gave  him  them  from  memory.3 

By  the  next  post  came  a  letter  from  Frere  stating 

1  See  below,  May  I2th,  and  Letter  of  May  8th. 

2  I  am  sorry  to  put  on  record  this  imputation  of  bad  faith,  for  which 
there  was  not  the  smallest  foundation,  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  some  of 
us  did  talk  so,  and  I  must  not  falsify  the  record.    See  above,  April  27. 

3  See  Letter  from  W.  H.  F.,  May  i  ith,  and  note. 


62     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

that  the  Literae  certificatoriae  about  Consecrations 
are  preserved  in  the  Privy  Seals  and  Signed  Bills, 
and  calendared  in  the  Domestic  State  Papers  ;  but 
they  are  very  imperfect.  E.g.  Repps'  consecration 
is  thus  recorded,  but  the  letter  about  Sampson  is 
wanting.  Sent  this  on  to  Gasparri  at  the  Vatican 
while  the  Commission  was  actually  sitting. 

In  the  afternoon  we  visited  Sta  Maria  in  Tra- 
stevere,  Sta  Cecilia  and  S.  Bartolomeo  in  Insula. 
At  S.  Cecilia  we  saw  the  caldarium  and  the  stone 
of  the  martyrdom,  but  could  not  look  at  the  shrine 
of  the  high  altar  as  Quarant'  ore  was  going  on. 

The  Commission  has  held  its  last  meeting.  At 
present  we  have  to  wait  and  see  to  what  Cardinals 
the  matter  will  be  referred.  Portal  has  seen 
Cardinal  Vincenzo  Vannutelli  to-day,  and  arranged 
for  us  to  go  and  call  upon  him. 

Frere  writes  that  he  has  a  conviction,  growing 
stronger  as  he  works  out  the  evidence,  "  that  in  the 
first  blush  of  Marian  revulsion  they  were  inclined 
to  dispute  the  orders  of  the  English  Ordinal,"  but 
he  is  coming  to  suspect  more  and  more,  and  hopes 
to  prove,  "  that  this  doubt  was  a  steadily  diminishing 
quantity  :  possibly  even  that  the  influence  of  Pole 
or  even  Rome  was  exerted  against  it,  and  that  the 
reordinations  which  prevailed  in  the  early  months 
were  afterwards  discouraged."1 

May  8.  Called  on  Mr.  Oxenham,  and  met  there 
Mr.  Bliss,  who  is  working  for  the  English  Govern- 
ment in  the  Archives  of  the  Vatican. 

Cardinal  Galimberti  dead. 

Duchesne  saw  Cardinal  Rampolla,  who  expressed 
a  wish  that  we  should  stay  in  Rome  for  the  present, 

1  See  his  final  conclusions  in  his  book,  The  Marian  Reaction. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  63 

and  hold  ourselves  in  readiness  to  give  information 
to  the  Commission  of  Cardinals  which  is  now 
appointed.  He  also  wishes  us  to  wait  upon  him, 
but  before  this  to  see  some  other  Cardinals  also. 
Duchesne  suggests  the  two  Vannutelli,  Mazzella, 
and  Segna. 

Letter  from  the  Archbishop  of  York,  who  is  at 
Florence,  giving  assurance  that  the  prayer  after  the 
Litany  in  the  Consecration  of  Bishops  is,  by  the 
unvarying  use  of  both  provinces,  said  by  the  Arch- 
bishop himself. 

May  9.  Finished  my  article  de  Unitate^  In 
the  afternoon  we  called  with  Portal  on  Cardinal 
Vincenzo  Vannutelli  in  Via  Giulia.  He  received  us 
rather  effusively.  Portal  knew  him  when  he  was 
nuncio  at  Lisbon.  He  gesticulates  extraordinarily 
in  talking.  He  told  us  that  he  is  on  the  Commis- 
sion :  that  means  that  it  is  a  special  Commission, 
unless  perhaps  he  has  replaced  Galimberti  on  the 
Commission  for  Reunion.  He  had  not  much  to  say 
except  in  laudation  of  the  English  people  and 
the  great  part  we  have  to  play  in  the  work  of  civili- 
zation. We  talked  a  little  about  the  relations  of 
Anglicans  and  Romans  at  Zanzibar — Smythies 
consulting  the  Roman  Bishop  about  his  Swahili 
Catechism,  and  so  on.  He  said  we  might  certainly 
call  on  his  brother  Cardinal  Serafino  Vannutelli. 

1  The  first  part  of  this  appeared  in  the  Revue  Anglo-Romaine,  Vol. 
II,  p.  529.  The  second  and  much  longer  part  should  have  followed, 
but  was  suppressed  in  consequence  of  the  publication  of  the  ency- 
clical Satis  cognitum.  It  was  suggested  to  M.  Portal  from  a  high 
quarter  that  he  could  not  decently  publish  it  immediately  after  the 
utterance  of  the  Pope  on  the  same  subject.  The  whole  was  after- 
wards translated  into  English,  and  appeared  under  the  title  The 
Unity  of  the  Church  as  Taught  by  English  Theologians,  being  pub- 
lished by  S.P.C.K.  for  the  Church  History  Society. 


64     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Telegraphed  for  copies  of  de  Hierarchies  to 
present  to  Cardinals. 

May  10.  Sunday.  Went  to  High  Mass  at 
St.  Peter's.  Music  good.  Behaviour  of  crowd 
atrocious. 

Sketched  out  with  N.  the  plan  of  a  Supplement 
to  the  de  Hierarckia,  dealing  with  the  points  in 
which  the  Cardinals  are  interested. 

In  the  afternoon  we  called  on  Duchesne.  The 
Abbe"  Daniel  was  there,  Recteur  of  Dinant  in 
Brittany.  He  was  well  acquainted  with  N.  of  P. 
before  his  fall,  and  we  talked  much  about  that. 
With  Duchesne  we  had  a  long  talk  about  the 
primitive  arrangements  of  the  Roman  Church,  as 
illustrated  by  the  Canons  of  Hippolytus.  He  thinks 
that  originally,  when  the  Roman  Church  was 
the  only  Church  for  Italy,  there  probably  was  a 
Presbyterium  consisting  partly  of  bishops,  partly  of 
priests,  or  that  possibly  all  the  priests  had  episcopal 
powers  ;  and  that  a  similar  arrangement  prevailed  at 
Alexandria,  of  which  the  well-known  passage  of  St. 
Jerome  expresses  a  tradition. 

May  u.  Began  the  Supplement  and  worked 
hard  at  it  all  day. 

May  12.  Letter  from  Wood  enclosing  docu- 
ments. The  Mandate  to  Consecrate  is  what  is 
usually  known  as  the  Royal  Assent :  but  a  full 
explanation  of  the  whole  process  of  issuing  Letters 
Patent  shows  that  this  is  the  original  Sign  Manual 
which  set  the  whole  thing  in  motion,  and  that  the 
king  gave  this  order  only,  which  was  afterwards 
expanded  in  the  routine  of  the  office  to  the  usual 
form.1 

1  See  below,  pp.  153-68. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  65 

Father  Puller  and  I  called  on  Cardinal  Segna, 
who  was  exceedingly  pleasant,  talking  very  frankly 
about  our  subject,  and  stating  various  objections 
which  I  noted  for  the  Supplement.  He  lives  in 
a  very  humble  apartment,  102  Ripetta.  He  is  just 
going  to  preside  over  the  General  Chapter  of  the 
Capuchins. 

Worked  hard  at  the  Supplement.  Also  prepared 
a  letter  about  the  Mandate  to  be  printed  for 
Cardinal  Mazzella. 

May  13.  Worked  hard  at  the  Supplement 
all  day.  The  Abbe  Zorn  de  Bulach  came  to 
dinner ;  he  is  brother  to  two  ladies  staying  here ; 
is  attached  to  the  Accademia  Ecclesiastica,  and 
works  in  the  Congregation  of  the  Council.  A 
friend  of  Merry  del  Val.  He  seemed  to  know 
nothing  about  our  question  beyond  the  merest 
gossip.1  Went  to  the  Archives. 

May  14.  Ascension  Day.  Father  Puller  and  I 
called  in  the  morning  on  Cardinal  Mazzella  at  the 
German  College,  giving  him  the  Archbishop  of 
York's  letter,  and  a  passage  from  Pilkington 
received  this  morning  from  Mr.  Ross-Lewin  to  the 
effect  that  the  Edwardine  priests  were  reconciled  in 
Mary's  time  by  unction  only.2  He  was  stiff  and 
grumpy,  but  speaking  English  seemed  to  express 
himself  with  great  difficulty.  He  could  not  think 
why  so  much  fuss  was  made  about  Orders.  The 
Pope  was  the  great  question. 

1  He  had  very  edifying  views  about  Julius  1 1 ;  explained  that  he  was 
converted  after  his  election  to  the  Papacy,  and  thenceforward  said 
Mass  every  day.      I   asked  whether  he  did  so  on  the  day  of  the 
storming  of  Mirandola,  but  of  this  event  the  abbd  appeared  to  know 
nothing. 

2  See  below,  Letter  of  May  ijth. 

F 


66     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Worked  all  day,  and  much  of  the  night,  at 
the  Supplement. 

May  15.  Father  Puller  called  on  Cardinal 
Serafino  Vannutelli — one  of  the  most  papabili — and 
found  him  most  pleasant.  He  has  to  do  with  the 
question,  but  confesses  himself  sadly  ignorant  of 
English  affairs. 

Finished  the  Supplement1 — about  sixty  hours' 
work  since  Sunday. 

Portal  at  once  charged  me  with  a  new  pamphlet 
— suggested  by  the  ignorance  of  Cardinal  Vannu- 
telli— a  brief  outline  of  the  present  state  of  the 
Church  of  England,  with  a  clear  explanation  of 
parties.  This  to  be  finished  before  Monday. 

May  1 6.  Worked  hard  all  day  at  the  new 
pamphlet. 


May  17.  Heard  a  prone  for  the  first  time  in 
Rome ;  at  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Apostles,  at 
eight  o'clock.  Very  few  people  attending.2 

Dined  with  Mr.  Nancrede  at  the  Hotel  d'Alle- 
magne.  Miss  Patteson  (sister  of  the  Bishop  of 
Melanesia)  there.  Miss  Nancrede,  a  fixture  in 
Rome,  had  much  to  say  about  identifications  of 
Marion  Crawford's  characters  generally  recognized 
in  society.  E.g.  Corona,  a  certain  Vittoria  Colonna 
(Duchessa  di  Sermoneta  ?),  Astrardente,  one  of  the 

1  Dissertationis  Af>ologeticae  de  Hierarchia    Anglicana    Supple- 
mentum,    auctore  T.    A.    Lacey.     Romae,    ex    typographia    Pacis, 
Philippi  Cuggiani,  1896. 

2  I  had  told  Portal  that  I  wanted  to  attend  a  parochial  service. 
"  II  n'y  a  pas  d'offices  paroissiales  k  Rome,"  he  replied.     A  Roman 
gentleman  explained  that  the  one  function  of  a  parochus  in  Rome 
was  to  give  faculties  for  other  priests  to  celebrate  marriages.     This 
was  probably  morose. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  67 

Principi  Orsini  lately  dead  ;  Spicca,  an  attach^  at 
the  Russian  Embassy  ;  Ghisleri,  Crawford  him- 
self! 

Finished  the  new  pamphlet,  or  rather  memoir, 
de  Re  Anglicana^  in  the  small  hours — a  week's 
work  over  the  two,  not  much,  if  any,  less  than 
ninety  hours. 

May  1 8.  At  8.20  left  for  Monte  Cassino. 
Arrived  Cassino  11.15.  Dejeuner  at  albergo  in 
town,  which  is  a  queer  tangle  of  dirty  houses,  the 
streets  all  paved  with  flagstones.  In  church  a 
seated  figure  of  St.  Germanus,  robed  in  silk  cope 
and  mitre.  Walked  up  to  the  Monastery,  an  hour 
and  a  quarter.  The  Prior,  Dom  Amelli,  showed 
us  the  archives  and  several  manuscripts,  one  having 
some  writing  by  St.  Thomas  in  the  margin.  The 
Convent,  he  explained,  is  suppressed,  but  the 
monks  go  on  as  Canons  of  the  Church,  which  is 
regarded  as  Cathedral  of  the  Abbot's  diocese.  The 
best  of  the  printed  books  of  the  library  have  been 
taken  away  by  the  Government.  The  Archives 
and  Manuscripts  remain  as  national  monuments,  of 
which  the  monks  are  custodians.  So  also  is  the 
whole  building.  They  can  alter  nothing,  or  even 
repair,  without  leave.  They  cannot  take  a  book 
out  of  what  remains  of  the  library  without  a  per- 
mission. For  whatever  land  they  have  in  hand 
they  pay  rent.  They  are,  however,  forming  a  new 
private  library — about  30,000  volumes  so  far — very 
casually  made  up,  mostly  by  gifts.  Here,  too,  they 
have  their  printing  shop. 

Supper  in  the  refectory  at  8 — soup,  eggs,  cheese, 
fruit.     Compline  8.45  in  the  Tower  of  St.  Benedict, 
1  Below,  pp.  195-209. 


68     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

sc.  in  the  chapel  where  he  died,  this  being  the 
anniversary  of  its  dedication. 

May  19.  Mass  in  the  same  chapel,  where  all  the 
offices  are  said  this  week.  Coffee  and  roll  after- 
wards in  a  room  off  the  kitchen,  where  these  are 
served  every  morning  for  those  who  desire  it. 
Dinner  in  refectory  at  12.  Soup,  two  dishes  of 
flesh  meat,  cheese,  and  raw  beans.  Dom  Dunstan 
Sibley  from  Fort  Augustus  showed  us  everything, 
and  was  very  attentive.  They  have  a  diocesan 
seminary,  a  general  seminary,  a  petit  sdminaire, 
and  a  school  for  lay  boys.  Monks  are  at  the  head 
of  all  departments,  but  there  are  some  twenty 
secular  priests  as  well  engaged  in  tuition. 

In  the  evening  we  went  to  see  the  Abbate  Tosti, 
who  is  very  feeble  and  palsied.  He  has  permission 
to  say  Mass  in  his  cell  seated.  He  talked  enthusi- 
astically of  the  Bishop  of  Brechin,  and  preached  us 
quite  a  sermon  on  the  duty  of  submission  to  the  Pope. 

Nightingale  singing  all  night. 

May  20.  Up  at  half-past  four  to  attend  Mattins 
in  the  Tower — Nocturns  and  Lauds.  Prime  and 
Terce  are  said  before  Mass  at  7.45.  Between  these 
two  offices  the  monks  all  say  their  Mass.  To-day, 
however,  a  Black  Mass  was  sung  in  the  Basilica 
at  8 — the  Office  of  the  Dead  preceding,  and  Prime 
and  Terce  followed,  whether  with  another  Mass  I 
did  not  hear,  in  the  Tower.  The  monks  sang  the 
Mass  in  their  choir  behind  the  high  altar  very 
devoutly.  They  can  see  practically  nothing  of  the 
priest  at  the  altar. 

At  9  left  the  monastery,  Dom  Dunstan  walking 
halfway  down  the  hill  with  us.  Train  at  10.40, 
arriving  in  Rome  1.30. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  69 

Found  proofs  to  correct. 

May  21.  Worked  several  hours  with  Portal  re- 
vising for  Revue. 

May  22.  Visited  Sta  Agnese  in  Piazza  Navona, 
or  Circo  Agonale,  and  saw  the  vaults,  formerly  sub- 
structure of  the  Circus,  where  the  child  was  exposed 
to  shame. 

Prepared  statistical  appendix  to  memoir,  de  Re 
Anglicana. 

Visited  Sta  Agnese  fuori  le  Mure.  Part  of  the 
church  was  rebuilt  by  "  Jul.  Card.  S.P.  ad  Vine. 
Sixti  iiii  Pont.  Max.  nepos  " — one  of  his  few  good 
works.  Baldaquin,  built  by  Paul  V,  makes  a  curious 
narrow  front  to  the  altar.  The  throne  is  in  the 
apse,  but  the  altar  is  placed  with  back  towards  it. 
Visited  also  Sta  Costanza,  close  by. 

Evening,  8  o'clock,  called  on  Cardinal  Parocchi  at 
the  Palazzo  del  Vicariato.  More  than  an  hour  in 
antechamber.  Saw  him  in  a  room  with  a  big  table 
arranged  as  for  committees.  He  was  extraordin- 
arily kind.  Gave  him  a  copy  of  de  Hierarchia,  which 
he  apparently  had  not  seen.  He  pressed  us  to  come 
again.  Expressed  a  great  admiration  for  England, 
and  acknowledged  that  such  a  country,  with  such 
a  history,  must  have  ecclesiastically  a  considerable 
provincial  independence. 

May  23.  To  the  Lateran  for  the  great  function. 
The  Offices  were  sung  up  to  None  in  the  Chapel  of 
the  Choir.  Then  the  Canons  and  Singers  went  to 
the  choir  before  the  apse,  where  an  altar  was  dressed 
before  the  throne.  The  Patriarch  of  Antiock, 
Mgr.  Casetta,  who  is  vicegerent  of  the  Cardinal 
Vicar  (odd  arrangement)  officiated.  The  assistants 
wore  chasubles  cut  away  just  below  the  waist  in 


70     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

front,  full-length  behind.  The  Prophecies  were 
sung  from  a  lectern  in  the  middle,  the  Patriarch 
sitting  on  the  Faldstool  before  the  Altar  and  rising 
to  say  the  Collects.  He  was  then  vested  in  cope, 
and  all  went  in  procession  by  the  long  corridor 
to  the  Baptistery,  singing  the  psalm  Quemadmodum. 
Then  came  the  blessing  of  the  font,  all  the  clergy 
standing  round  the  inner  part  of  the  Baptistery,  i.e. 
the  ancient  piscina.  The  procession,  singing  the 
Litany,  returned  by  the  corridor  on  the  other  side 
of  the  Apse,  and  Mass  was  sung.  Three  hours 
altogether. 

In  the  afternoon  Scannell  called,  a  priest  of  the 
English  College  accompanying  him.  He  explained 
that  he  had  been  keeping  out  of  our  way  because  of 
the  fashion  he  was  spied  upon.  He  spoke  as  if  he 
were  certain  there  would  be  a  negative  decision  of 

o 

the  question.  It  was  impossible,  said  Portal. 
"  C'est  1'impossible  qui  arrive,"  said  Scannell.  Still 
he  was  very  friendly  and  pleasant,  and  appears 
to  be  much  disgusted  with  the  Tablet. 

May  24.  Whitsunday.  I  went  to  S.  Nicola  da 
Tolentino  at  eight  o'clock  and  heard  the  Armenians 
sing  their  Office.1  Two  seniors  in  black,  the  juniors 
some  in  red  gowns  with  blue  yokes,  others  in  blue 
with  red  yokes.  At  last  one  of  the  seniors  was 
vested  in  a  sort  of  cope,  with  red  and  white  perpen- 
dicular stripes,  and  went  to  the  lectern  accompanied 
by  two  candles.  At  this  point  I  had  to  leave. 

Then  to  S.  Clemente ;  where  the  Mass  was 
exquisitely  sung  by  seven  or  eight  Dominican 
fathers :  the  priest  behind  the  Altar,  the  Gospel 

1  A  College  of  Armenians  in  communion  with  Rome  has  for  some 
time  enjoyed  the  use  of  this  church. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  71 

sung  from  the  Ambon.  Benedictus  immediately 
after  Sanctus.  Then  perfect  silence  until  the  end 
of  the  Canon,  the  Fathers  all  in  prostration.  They 
bow  from  the  waist  on  entering  and  leaving,  and 
during  all  the  Collects.  The  priest  sat  for  the 
Epistle,  reading  from  a  book  held  before  him  ;  stood 
throughout  Gloria  and  Credo.  Oblation  per  unum, 
and  Unde  et  memores  said  brachiis  extensis  in 
modum  crucis.  Afterwards  a  delightful  Irish  lad, 
a  lay  brother,  showed  us  the  lower  church  l 

Afternoon.  Portal  came  full  of  news.  Letter  from 
Lord  Halifax  enclosing  a  copy  of  one  he  has  written 
to  Cardinal  Rampolla  respecting  a  memoir  by  Mr. 
Gladstone,2  which  we  are  to  translate  into  French 
and  give  to  the  Cardinal. 

Duchesne  has  been  offered  an  honorary  Doctorate 
by  Cambridge. 

We  went  on  to  the  Farnese.  M.  Fabre  there  and 
le  pere  Lapotre. 

***** 

Father  Puller  drew  them  into  a  talk  about  ver- 
nacular services,  and  all  were  in  favour  of  saying 
the  Mass  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  N.  also  in  favour 
of  saying  the  Canon  aloud.  He  would  also  like 

1  He  told  with  perfect  simplicity  and  humanity  the  story,  depicted 
in  a  fresco  of  the  tenth  century,  of  the  mother  recovering  her  child 
from  the  chapel  beneath  the  sea.     "  That  is  a  beautiful  story,"  I  said. 
"  There's  not  many  believes  it,  sor,"  he  replied  sadly.     I  heard  Puller 
murmuring  something  about  "  evidence,"  but  I  dug  my  elbow  into  his 
side  to  silence  the  historic  conscience,  and  so  we  left  the  boy  happy 
in  our  acceptance  of  the  legend.     After  Mass,  the  sacred  ministers 
came  down  from  the  altar  and  sat  on  a  bench  between  the  ambones, 
while  Veni  Creator  was  sung.     One  of  us  made  some  remark  about 
this  unusual  ceremony,  and  the  boy  exclaimed  enthusiastically,  "  Yes, 
just  like  the  Apostles  on  the  day  of  Pentecost ! "    O  sancta  simplicitas  ! 

2  Addressed  to  the  Archbishop  of  York.     For  the  text,  see  below, 
PP-  139-49- 


72     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

to  have  the  task  of  reforming  the  Breviary.  He 
would  do  away  with  all  the  arrangements  of  hours, 
responses,  etc.,  for  private  recitation,  leaving  them 
intact  for  common  recitation.  For  private  reci- 
tation he  would  appoint  simply  so  many  psalms 
each  day,  and  lessons  from  the  New  Testament. 
He  thought  there  was  a  great  deal  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment not  worth  reading.  He  could  undertake  the 
task  in  one  year  if  alone  :  if  he  had  one  colleague 
it  would  take  three  years ;  if  ten  colleagues,  a 
century. 

May  25.  A  good  deal  of  work  over  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's letter.  Complete  holiday  in  the  city.  Crowds 
of  peasants  and  others  driving  about  in  carriages. 
The  holiday  delays  publication  of  our  pamphlets. 

May  26.  Feast  of  St.  Philip  Neri :  more  com- 
plete holiday  even  than  yesterday.  Called  on 
Nancrede  in  the  afternoon.  At  night  went  to  the 
Quarant*  ore  at  St.  Peter's.  Wonderful  effect  of 
about  a  hundred  candles  on  the  high  altar ;  no 
other  lights  in  the  church  except  an  odd  candle 
standing  here  and  there  on  a  high  standard. 

May  27.  Mr.  Gladstone's  letter  finished,  and 
taken  by  Portal  to  Cardinal  Rampolla,  who  was 
delighted  with  it.  De  Re  Anglicana  came  from 
the  printer  finished.  At  night  Mr.  Turton  (New 
Zealander)  and  I  went  to  the  Colosseum  by  moon- 
light. 

May  28.  Breakfast  with  M.  Duchesne,  who  has 
decided  to  come  to  Cambridge.  Pere  Delehaye,  the 
Bollandist,  there :  also  Pere  Riviere,  Jesuit — who 
is  writing  a  history  of  the  Society — M.  Fabre, 
M.  Portal,  and  two  laymen. 

Duchesne  let  out  that  the  Description  of  the  Rites 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  73 

by  Pole  was  not  before  the  Commission.  He  thinks 
the  evidence  of  its  having  been  before  Julius  III  is 
of  great  importance.1 

Evening.  I  went  to  call  on  the  Cardinal  Vicar 
with  copies  of  the  pamphlets,  but  was  too  late. 

May  29.  Visited  the  Lateran  Museum  under 
Duchesne's  guidance.2  I  was  too  tired  to  enjoy 
it  much.  Finished  revising  my  article  on  Unity 
for  the  Revue — a  tremendous  task — and  on  Portal's 
advice  substituted  a  new  ending,  glancing  at  the 
Vatican  Council,  and  avowing  that  the  Pastor 
Aiternus  is  no  insuperable  bar  to  union. 

Evening.  I  called  on  the  Cardinal  Vicar.  I 
spoke  pretty  fully  of  the  state  of  things  in  England  ; 
he  asked  particularly  if  it  were  certain  that  we  can 
get  behind  the  prejudices  of  the  people  and  bring 
them  on  gradually  to  Catholic  truth.  He  did  not 
actually  make  the  comparison,  but  obviously  meant 
to  ask  if  we  can  do  it  more  effectually  than  the 
Romanists.  I  illustrated  the  progress  made  by 
showing  that  it  is  easy  now  to  speak  in  public  about 
reunion  and  about  the  Holy  See  in  a  way  which 
would  have  been  impossible  twenty  years  ago. 
Portal  describes  the  Cardinal  Vicar  as  very  in- 
telligent, very  pious,  but  thoroughly  suspicious  of 
the  reunion  movement.  He  could  not  keep  me 
long,  as  he  had  several  people  to  see,  and  the 
Ordinations  to-morrow  ;  but  he  asked  me  to  call  on 
him  again  before  leaving  Rome. 

1  See  below,  pp.  177-81.  I  do  not  seem  to  have  noted  in  the  Diary 
my  work  on  this  in  the  Archives,  or  the  aid  rendered  by  Mr.  Bliss, 
which  ought  to  be  acknowledged  here. 

2  Duchesne  stood  rapt  in  admiration  before  one  of  the  immense 
canvasses  painted  on  commission  for  Pius  IX.     At  last  he  gave  forth 
his  criticism  :  "  C'est  un  beau  cadre." 


74     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND   OTHER   DOCUMENTS 

May  30.  Father  Puller  went  to  the  Ordinations 
at  St.  John  Lateran.  Began  at  seven  o'clock. 
Ended  at  12.5. 

I  went  round,  leaving  cards  and  pamphlets  on  all 
the  Cardinals  in  Rome. 

May  31.  Trinity  Sunday '.  Heard  the  Armenian 
Mass  at  S.  Nicola  da  Tolentino.  The  clerks  in 
red  or  blue,  as  last  Sunday,  stood  in  semicircle 
before  the  altar.  Priest  in  white  cope,  with  square 
standing  collar  and  white  silk  embroidered  cap, 
entered  with  deacon  and  subdeacon  in  red  silk 
tunics,  the  deacon  bearing  the  censer,  preceded  by 
two  candles  and  two  jangles,  circles  of  little  bells 
on  the  top  of  staves.  Arrived  at  the  altar,  the 
priest  censed  the  altar,  and  turning  round  censed 
also  each  clerk  in  the  semicircle.  The  normal 
position  of  deacon  and  subdeacon  was  at  the  ends 
of  the  semicircle ;  the  candle-bearers  took  their 
place  in  the  semicircle,  vested  like  the  others,  the 
jangle-bearers  at  each  end  of  the  altar,  where  they 
jangled  incessantly.  After  the  censing  the  priest 
blessed  all  with  a  crucifix,  a  ceremony  incessantly 
repeated.  Then  a  red  curtain  was  drawn  across, 
between  the  clerks  and  the  ministers  of  the  altar, 
for  a  short  time.  The  singing  went  on  without  a 
break. 

The  curtain  withdrawn,  one  clerk  out  of  the 
semicircle  read  a  lesson.  Then  the  deacon  took 
the  book  of  the  gospels  from  a  table  on  the  gospel 
side  of  the  sanctuary,  where  were  also  the  sacred 
vessels  and  four  candles  burning.  With  the  book 
he  passed  behind  the  altar,  candle-bearers  and 
jangles  preceding,  and  the  subdeacon  with  the 
incense  accompanying.  They  came  round  the 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  75 

altar,  and  the  deacon  mounted  to  it  at  the  gospel 
corner,  where  he  sang  the  gospel  facing  round l  the 
church,  the  priest  standing  by  him  and  the  sub- 
deacon  serving  the  incense  below,  the  candle-bearers 
standing  by  the  book. 

After  the  Gospel  much  singing.  Then  the 
deacon  took  the  sacred  vessels,  just  as  he  had  taken 
the  Gospel  book,  round  the  altar.  They  were 
covered  with  a  veil  of  gauze,  jewelled.  The  priest 
received  them,  held  them  above  his  head,  and  then 
placed  them  on  the  altar ;  then  rinsed  his  fingers. 
He  then  censed  the  oblations.  Much  singing 
followed,  the  deacon  now  standing  behind  the  priest 
censing,  and  from  time  to  time  turning  round  and 
censing  each  of  the  clerks  in  the  semicircle.  The 
subdeacon  sang  all  the  time.  Presently,  as  the 
canon  proceeded,  the  subdeacon  joined  the  deacon 
behind  the  priest,  the  candle-bearers  stood  on  either 
side  of  them,  and  the  jangle -bearers  beyond, 
making  a  line  of  six.  Then  all  knelt,  singing  the 
whole  time,  the  priest's  voice  being  occasionally 
heard.  The  actual  consecration  was  sung  by  the 
priest.  After  the  consecration  of  the  host  a  long 
amen  was  sung  by  the  deacon  or  subdeacon, 
repeated  by  the  chorus.  The  priest  genuflected. 
(N.B. — He  said  the  first  part  of  the  canon  brachiis 
extensis  in  modum  crucis).  After  the  consecration 
of  the  cup  all  rose  at  once,  the  priest  genuflecting, 
and  the  singing  was  resumed  :  the  deacon  as  before 
censing  the  altar  and  the  choir  incessantly.  After 
some  time  the  priest  turned  round  holding  chalice 
and  host,  and  chanted  several  verses,  the  rest  re- 
sponding ;  during  this  all  knelt.  Then  a  white 

1  Sic.     I  suppose  I  must  have  meant  down. 


76     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

curtain  was  drawn  across,  some  of  the  chorus  being 
within  it.  Presently  it  was  withdrawn,  and  the 
priest  had  now  put  on  his  cap  again.  (It  was  taken 
off  and  laid  on  the  altar  at  the  Offertory.)  He 
blessed,  and  then  turning  round  read  a  good  deal 
from  a  book  held  by  two  clerks  :  and  so  all  departed. 
Afterwards  a  person  in  lay  clothes,  who  had  been 
assisting  at  the  Mass  in  the  nave,  went  up  to  the 
altar  and  in  a  very  unceremonious  way  bustled  the 
sacred  vessels  off  to  the  credence  and  put  out  the 
candles.  The  Sacrament  is  reserved  on  the  high 
altar,  but  no  one  takes  any  notice  of  it. 

June  i.  Called  on  Cardinal  Scran" no  Vannutelli 
(34  Via  di  Monte  Giordano).  He  was  just  back 
from  Frascati  and  had  not  yet  read  the  pamphlets. 
He  was  keenly  interested  in  Mr.  Gladstone's  letter  ; 
he  had  read  about  it  in  the  Univers ;  was  it  true  ? 
I  asked  him  directly  whether  he  was  seised  of  our 
question.  He  said,  not  yet,  but  he  expected  to  be 
so  shortly:  meanwhile  he  thought  it  was  in  the  hands 
of  some  consultors.  My  interview  was  shortened  by 
the  announcement  of  a  lady  who  was  starting  for 
Bologna  in  the  morning.  I  went  on  to  Cardinal 
Vincenzo  Vannutelli  (147  Via  Giulia).  He  had 
read  the  pamphlets  and  found  them  clear.  I  would 
rather  have  had  a  request  for  explanation  than  the 
compliment.  I  spoke  about  Mr.  Gladstone's  letter. 
It  was  pretty  obvious  from  his  manner  that  he  had 
seen  it,  but  he  too  asked  for  information  about  it. 
He  thought  we  ought  not  to  leave  Rome  yet.  I 
tried  to  find  out  why,  but  without  success.  I  asked 
him  if  he  could  tell  me  what  is  the  actual  state  of 
affairs.  He  told  me  that  so  far  as  he  knew  Cardinal 
Mazzella  had  presented  his  report  to  the  Holy 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  77 

Father,  who  since  then  had  spoken  not  a  word 
about  it  to  any  one ;  but  he  thought — emphasizing 
this  as  a  mere  personal  impression — that  the  Pope 
might  perhaps  take  occasion  from  Mr.  Gladstone's 
letter  to  put  something  out  of  his  own  motion.  My 
interview  was  shortened  by  the  announcement  of 
a  lady  who  is  leaving  to-morrow  for  Bologna ! 

Afterwards  I  went  to  the  Cardinal  Vicar,  who  saw 
M.  Portal  before  me.  As  soon  as  I  got  into  the 
room  be  burst  out  about  some  new  discoveryto  the 
effect  that  St.  Pius  V  had  withdrawn,  or  wished  to 
withdraw,  the  Bull  Regnans  in  excelsis,  but  it  had 
passed  too  soon  into  promulgation.  We  ought  to 
work  at  this  in  the  Archives,  where  we  should  find 
evidence,  he  said,  of  the  friendliness  of  the  Roman 
authorities  of  that  time  for  Elizabeth.  It  was  the 
same  with  Sixtus  V,  who  detested  the  ecclesiastical 
policy  of  Philip.1  This,  he  thought,  when  published, 
would  deeply  impress  minds  in  England.  He  spoke 
warmly  of  the  loyaute"  de  soldat  of  the  Archbishop 
of  York. 

1  By  the  Cardinal's  advice  we  called  on  the  Jesuit,  Padre  Carini,  who 
gave  us  a  pamphlet  which  he  had  written  on  the  subject :  Monsignor 
Niccolb  Ormaneto,  Veronese,  Vescovo  di  Padova,  Nunzio  Apostolico 
alia  Corte  di  Filippo  II  Re  di  Spagna,  1^2-i^TJ.  The  revelation 
does  not  amount  to  much.  Ormaneto,  who  had  been  in  England  with 
Pole,  was  so  conscious  of  the  difficulties  hindering  the  proposed  war 
against  Elizabeth,  so  disgusted  with  the  King  of  France  for  inviting 
her  to  be  sponsor  to  his  daughter  in  baptism,  and  with  the  Duke  of 
Alva  for  making  a  treaty  with  her,  that  he  was  disposed  to  fall  back 
upon  the  alternative  plan  of  converting  the  Queen  instead  of  deposing 
her.  This  seemed  almost  impossible,  in  view  of  her  bad  character 
and  that  of  her  principal  minister,  "sed  apud  Deum  omnia  possibilia." 
All  this  is  detailed  in  his  correspondence  with  the  Cardinal  Secretary 
of  State,  where  he  also  explains  that  Pius  V  had  been  conscious  of 
his  mistake  in  publishing  the  Bull  of  Excommunication  and  Deposi- 
tion. "  Parlandone  sua  S1*  dopo  il  fatto,  volendo  che  si  rimediasse  a 
certi  disordini  che  erano  stati  per  occasione  di  quella  bolla  privatoria, 
la  quale  non  si  doveva  mai  pubblicare  se  no  quando  andava  1'esercito 


78     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

He  also  asked  with  considerable  emphasis 
whether  we  could  get  behind  the  prejudices  of 
the  English  people,  and  so  draw  them  on  to  the 
Catholic  Faith.  He  did  not  actually  draw  a  com- 
parison with  others,  which  was,  however,  pretty 
obvious.1  He  blessed  me  most  affectionately  on 
dismissing  me. 

June  2.  Visited  the  Palatine  with  Father 
Puller,  also  the  Ara  Coeli.  Evening,  dined  with 
Oxenham. 

June  3.  Times  of  Monday  arrived  with  Mr. 
Gladstone's  memoir  and  short  note  by  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York.  We  passed  this  on  to  the  Voce 
della  Verita. 

June  4.  Mgr.  Guthlin  (Lucius  Lector),2  talking 
with  Mgr.  Thomas,  reported  a  conversation  with 
Cardinal  Steinhliber  about  the  de  Re  Anglicana. 
"  Look  at  these  statistics,"  he  said,  "they  are  most 
remarkable.  All  these  religious,  and  these  retreats. 
Of  course  we  cannot  say  at  once  that  their  orders 
are  valid,  but  something  will  have  to  be  done." 

Later  in  the  day  we  all  called  on  Mgr.  Guthlin. 
He  is  canonist  to  the  French  Embassy  :  he 

in  Inghilterra  per  far  quella  impresa,  talche  in  una  mano  si  portassero 
le  chiavi  di  S.  Pietro,  che  era  la  privatione,  et  nel'  altra  la  spada  di 
S.  Paolo,  perche  1'essersi  pubblicata  la  bolla  privatoria  senza  far  la 
conquista  del  Regno  ha  causato  gran  male,  et  la  morte  di  molti 
huomini  catciet  fatta  quella  Donna  molto  maggiore  nimica  della  Sede 
Apra."  That  is  to  say,  the  Bull  should  not  have  been  published  until 
there  was  a  Spanish  army  well  placed  in  England.  The  most  inter- 
esting part  of  the  record  is  the  admission  that  the  sufferings  of  the 
English  Papists  were  a  consequence  of  the  Bull,  Elizabeth  having 
turned  upon  them  in  self-defence. 

1  His  persistence  in  recurring  to  this  theme  was  remarkable.     See 
above,  May   29th.     I   remember  that   he  also  talked   much  about 
the  Life  of  Cardinal  Manning,  then  recently  published. 

2  Author  of  Le  Conclave. 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  79 

repeated  his  conversation  with  Cardinal  Steinhiiber 
in  great  detail. 

We  afterwards  went  to  S.  Maria  in  Capella  to 
assist  at  the  Procession  of  the  Blessed  Sacrament, 
which  goes  round  the  garden  of  the  Convent,  Bene- 
diction being  given  at  two  improvised  altars. 

In  the  late  evening  I  called  on  M.  Duchesne. 
Mgr.  Guthlin  had  been  talking  to  him  also  about 
the  remarks  of  Cardinal  Steinhtiber,  which  he 
thinks  very  significant. 

He  asked  about  the  mission  of  the  Bishop  of 
Peterborough  to  Moscow :  was  he  attached  to 
the  extraordinary  embassy  ?  I  explained  the 
circumstances,  including  the  unwillingness  of  the 
Queen  to  give  her  consent.  He  and  M.  Fabre 
consider  that  the  most  interesting  feature  of  the 
proceeding  is  the  action  of  the  Church  apart  from, 
but  in  perfect  good  understanding  with  the  civil 
power. 

This  has  been  a  remarkable  Fete  Dieu.  For 
the  first  time  since  1870  there  have  been  proces- 
sions of  the  Blessed  Sacrament  in  the  streets.  This 
morning  Duchesne  himself  carried  it  from  a  little 
church  near  the  Farnese  into  the  Piazza  Farnese. 
In  the  afternoon  was  another  procession  in  the 
Piazza  di  Spagna.  There  was  no  difficulty  at  all  with 
the  authorities  or  with  the  people.  Duchesne  puts 
together  this,  and  the  Mass  the  other  day  at  the 
Ara  Coeli,1  and  the  speech  made  by  the  Marchese  di 
Rudini  in  the  Chamber  on  Tuesday  in  reference  to 
the  Pope's  intervention  with  Menelik  about  the 

1  A  Mass  of  Requiem  for  those  killed  in  the  disastrous  Abyssinian 
campaign,  which  was  attended  by  the  King,  the  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature, and  the  Roman  municipality. 


8o     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER   DOCUMENTS 

prisoners,  as  three  serious  indications  of  the 
approach  of  a  better  state  of  things. 

June  5.  Called  on  Cardinal  Segna,  but  got 
nothing  out  of  him,  except  pious  generalities.  He 
seems  to  be  very  much  at  a  loss  to  know  why  he 
was  made  Cardinal.  When  I  tried  to  engage  him 
more  closely  on  the  question  of  the  day  his  French 
suddenly  became  very  deficient.1 

Afternoon,  called  on  Cardinal  Steinhiiber.  Found 
him  extremely  pleasant,  but  in  no  way  encourag- 
ing. He  had  read  the  pamphlets  with  great  interest, 
and  was  of  course  interested  in  Mr.  Gladstone ;  a 
confrere  in  the  Society,  Father  Porter,  Archbishop 
of  Bombay,  had  often  told  him  that  he  was  sure 
Mr.  Gladstone  would  die  in  the  Catholic  Church. 

June  6.  Father  Puller  called  on  Cardinal 
Serafino  Vannutelli,  who  told  him  that  a  commis- 
sion of  Cardinals  was  forthwith  to  take  up  the 
question  of  the  Ordinations.  He  would  receive 
the  dossier  on  Monday,  and  the  first  meeting  would 
be  on  Wednesday  or  Thursday.  Father  Puller 
asked  him  directly  whether  it  was  a  special  Com- 
mission or  the  Holy  Office.  He  replied,  "  I  am  on 
this  Commission  :  I  am  also  in  the  Holy  Office." 
Father  Puller  concluded  from  his  manner  that 
it  was  not  the  Holy  Office. 

1  I  must  have  been  in  a  very  bad  temper  to  make  these  slighting 
remarks  on  Cardinal  Segna.  His  erudition,  old-fashioned  though  it 
was,  his  kindliness,  and  his  simplicity,  ought  to  have  made  it  impos- 
sible so  to  speak  of  him.  I  remember  his  words  :  "  Le  Saint  Pere 
m'a  fait  Cardinal,  je  ne  sais  pas  pourquoi "  ;  and  I  do  not  know  how 
they  could  be  taken  for  anything  but  an  expression  of  genuine  humility. 
Others  could  tell  why  he  was  made  Cardinal.  His  repeated  courtesy 
to  friends  whom  I  afterwards  commended  to  him,  and  notably  to  the 
late  Mr.  David  Greig,  in  whom  he  found  a  kindred  spirit,  shames  me 
into  making  this  most  inadequate  apology. 


A   ROMAN    DIARY  81 

June  5.  Forgot  to  mention  that  this  morning  we 
assisted  at  Mass  in  the  crypt  at  St.  Peter's,  cele- 
brated by  M.  Portal ;  seven  Sisters  of  Chanty  from 
S.  Onofrio  also  assisted. 

June  7.  Heard  the  Pope's  Mass  in  the  private 
chapel  of  the  apartment  at  8  o'clock.  Afterwards 
two  parties  had  private  audience,  but  the  Pope 
being  very  fatigued  we  did  not  manage  to  secure 
one.  He  came  into  the  outer  room  and  blessed  us 
all,  "  For  you  and  for  your  families." 

Portal  called  on  Cardinal  Serafino  Vannutelli, 
who  told  him  that  the  instruction  to  the  Com- 
mission was  to  study  the  documents  for  a  month. 
He  said  among  other  things  that  we  had  made  a 
good  impression  ;  we  have  made  it  evident  that  the 
question  is  a  serious  one.  They  are  much  struck 
by  the  absence  of  timidity  or  supplication  in  our 
manner.  I  suppose  there  is  no  "  drop-down-dead- 
ativeness." 

Afternoon,  we  called  at  the  Farnese,  and  went  on 
with  Duchesne  and  M.  Fabre  to  the  Procession  at 
Casa  Torlonia,  in  which  we  joined. 

June  8.  Called  in  the  morning  on  the  Superior 
of  the  Sulpicians  to  say  goodbye.  Afterwards  to 
the  Vatican  to  see  Cardinal  Rampolla  by  appoint- 
ment at  one  o'clock.  Congregations  were  just 
breaking  up.  Cardinals  Serafino  Vannutelli,  Segna, 
and  Steinhiiber  met  us  in  the  antechamber  and 
greeted  us  warmly.  Father  Puller  and  I  went  in 
first  to  the  Cardinal.  He  was  curiously  nervous  in 
manner,  but  most  encouraging.  He  sent  a  message 
for  Mr.  Gladstone  direct  from  the  Holy  Father, 
that  he  was  much  touched  by  the  expressions  used 
in  the  memoir.  He  said  with  great  emphasis,  "  Le 
G 


82     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND   OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Saint  Pere  s'est  occupe  beaucoup  lui-meme  de  votre 
question,  et  vous  pourrez  vous  assurer  qu'il  la 
traitera  avec  la  plus  parfaite  impartiality.  II  ne 
cherche  que  la  v^rite",  mais  avec  le  plus  possible 
de  la  chariteV'  He  repeated  this  several  times,  and 
added,  "  Voila  en  deux  mots  notre  politique."  We 
got  to  the  subject  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  work  on 
Butler,  and  he  then  spoke  in  Mr.  Gladstone's  own 
words  of  the  necessity  of  combination  against  un- 
belief. 

Father  Puller  then  left  for  Milan.  Portal  and  I 
called  at  the  Farnese,  and  afterwards  at  S.  Maria 
in  Capella. 

Returning  to  the  Pension  we  found  Mgr.  Marini, 
Substitute  of  the  Rota,  waiting  for  us.  He  is 
launching  a  review  in  connection  with  the  move- 
ment for  the  reunion  of  the  Eastern  churches,  of 
which  he  is  going  to  print  at  once  10,000  copies  ; 
the  inference  is  that  he  has  very  influential  back- 
ing. He  wants  our  co-operation. 

We  afterwards  drove  round  the  Villa  Borghese, 
and  after  dining  left  Rome  at  10.20  for  Pisa  and 
Genoa. 

June  9.  Soon  after  sunrise  got  a  very  good  view 
of  Pisa  from  the  train ;  Duomo,  Baptistery  and 
Campanile,  as  well  as  of  the  river.  It  rained  hard 
all  day,  and  we  got  hardly  any  views  of  the  Alps, 
but  there  was  much  fresh  snow. 

June  10.  Arrived  at  Paris  soon  after  seven  and 
drove  straight  to  the  Lazarists.  Afterwards  called 
on  M.  Leve",  the  printer  of  the  Monde  and  of  the 
Revue  Anglo- Romaine.  He  is  terribly  crippled 
with  gout ;  a  most  pious  and  edifying  man.  Then 
to  the  Institut  Catholique,  which  is  installed  in  the 


A   ROMAN   DIARY  83 

old  Carmelite  Convent,  where  the  massacres  of 
September  began.  Saw  Mgr.  Gasparri,  and  with 
him  called  on  Mgr.  d'Hulst,  the  rector  of  the 
Institut.  Talked  with  him  of  our  doings  in  Rome, 
and  of  English  affairs  generally,  presenting  him 
with  a  copy  of  de  Re  Anglicana.  He  was  much 
struck  by  the  suggestion  that  the  Irish  are  the 
great  hindrance  to  the  acceptance  of  Catholic 
teaching  by  the  English,1  and  turning  to  Gasparri, 
said,  "  Like  the  Poles  in  Russia."  We  called  also 
on  M.  Arthur  Loth  at  the  office  of  La  Vtritt,  and 
on  M.  Tavernier  at  the  office  of  FUnivers.  The 
latter  had  just  received  from  his  correspondent2  a 
telegram  warning  him  not  to  be  too  keen  in  support 
of  Portal.  That  means,  they  agreed,  that  some 
one  is  preparing  a  blow  for  Portal.  We  also  called 
on  1'Abbe  Klein,  but  did  not  find  him  at  home. 

June  ii.  At  the  Community  Mass  at  the 
Lazarists  seven  seminarists  communicated,  and 
also  several  lay  folk.  The  normal  thing  on  week- 
days, I  was  assured.  M.  Boudinhon  came  up  from 
the  country  to-day  to  see  me — a  most  cheery, 
jovial  man.  We  read  my  Supplementum  together, 
and  he  was  keenly  interested  in  the  Council  of 
Mainz,  and  in  the  description  of  the  Ordinal  by 
Pole.  We  then  talked  about  the  coming  Ency- 
clical.3 Gasparri  had  a  long  interview  with  the 
Pope  about  it  before  leaving  Rome,  and  had  de- 
scribed what  was  coming  to  M.  Boudinhon.  The 
object  of  the  Pope  is  to  settle  the  question  as  to 

1  He  had  gathered  this  from  the  Life  of  Manning,  and  asked  me 
whether  it  was  true. 

2  Sic.     I  do  not  remember  the  particulars. 

3  The  Apostolic  Letter  Satis  Cognttum,  of  which  I  had  already 
heard  something  from  Mgr.  Gasparri  in  Rome. 


84     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

the  difference  of  unicitas  and  unitas,  showing  that 
the  Ecclesia  una  is  not  numerically  the  same  as  the 
Ecclesia  unica.  This  is  important,  as  it  will  justify 
M.  Boudinhon's  theory  about  schism,1  as  not  cutting 
off  from  the  Church  absolutely,  but  as  depriving 
the  schismatics  of  the  legitimate  exercise  of  their 
functions. 

The  Abb6  Klein  also  called  to  see  me.  He  was 
very  pleasant,  avoiding  delicate  ground,  and  asked 
me  to  find  him  an  "installation"  at  Cambridge  for 
himself  and  a  pupil  at  the  summer  meeting. 

A.  and  B.  also  called  to  see  me.  Left  Paris  at 
9  o'clock,  evening. 

Got  the  Monde  for  to-morrow,  containing  a  very 
remarkable  communication  from  the  Roman  corre- 
spondent. He  speaks  of  our  hearing  the  Pope's 
Mass  last  Sunday,  with  comments  which  could 
hardly  have  been  inspired  by  any  one  but  Cardinal 
Rampolla.  He  adds  that  the  Pope  will  shortly 
have  ready  an  utterance  on  the  Anglican  question, 
which  will  not  be  a  reply  to  Mr.  Gladstone,  as  it 
was  begun  before  Mr.  Gladstone's  letter  appeared. 

June  12.  Arrived  Holborn  Viaduct  6  a.m. 
Went  up  to  Highgate.  Afterwards  called  on  Lord 
Halifax,  and  stayed  to  dine  with  him. 

1  For  which  see  his  articles,  Printout^  Schisme  et  Juridiction,  in 
the  Revue  Anglo-Romaine,  Tome  II,  pp.  97-107,  and  160-71. 


LETTERS 


Ill 
:  LETTERS 

M.  Portal  to  T.A.L. 

19  mars,  1896. 

MGR.  GASPARRI  est  parti  pour  Rome, 
mande*  par  le  Pape,  pour  assister  aux 
stances  ou  seront  traite*es  les  affaires  d'Angleterre. 

II  me  prie  de  vous  demander  s'il  y  a  eu  des 
eveques  anglicans  sacres  d'apres  1'ordinal  de  1550 
ou  1552  qui  soient  revenus  a  1'Eglise  catholique. 
Ecrivez-lui  le  renseignement  a  Rome. 

II  ajoute :  "  Si  la  discussion  s'engage  a  fond, 
j'aurai  probablement  besoin  de  quelques  renseigne- 
ments  historiques.  Veuillez  en  prevenir  M.  Lacey. 
Je  lui  ecrirai,  et  priez  le  de  se  tenir  a  ma  disposition, 
pour  me  r^pondre  tout  de  suite." 

Mon  avis  est  que  vous  devriez  aller  a  Rome.  Je 
viens  de  le  telegraphier  a  Lord  Halifax.  En  tout 
cas  il  y  a  urgence  a  agir  de  votre  cote*  et  a  frapper 
un  bon  coup. 

Vous  avez  une  occasion  unique. 

The  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood  to  T.  A.  L. 

20  March)   1896. 

It  would  be  delightful  to  send  you  to  Rome  as 
envoy  extraordinary !  But  I  am  inclined  to  think 
that  you  will  be  of  more  use  at  home ;  matters  are 

87 


88    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

not  far  advanced  enough  for  personal  questioning. 
I  think  written  rather  than  spoken  words  are  safer 
at  present  as  regards  the  scientific  aspect.  Lord 
Halifax's  interviews  are  most  useful,  but  the  theo- 
logical and  historical  work  is,  I  fancy,  best  done  in 
writing.  Let  Gasparri  know  that  he  can  telegraph 
if  need  be  for  information,  or  submit  any  points  or 
questions  that  he  may  wish,  or  that  he  may  be 
directed  to  submit,  either  by  letter  or  by  telegram  ; 
and  if  it  be  needful  he  could  have  the  reply  by 
wire. 


Lord  Halifax  to  T.  A.  L. 

March  21,  1896. 

Please  read  these  letters  carefully  and  return  to 
me.  You  see  Moyes,  Gasquet,  and  Fr.  David  are 
gone  to  Rome  with  a  report  from  the  Cardinal 
against  our  Orders.  Also  Gasparri  has  been  sent 
for  to  Rome  by  the  Pope.  You  see  what  the  Abbe 
says.  He  proposes  that  you  and  Puller  should 
write  to  the  Pope  and  ask  to  give  personal  explica- 
tions as  to  our  Orders ;  and  the  last  thing  he  does 
is  to  telegraph  that  he  thinks  this  urgent. 

I  have  seen  Fr.  Puller.  He  is  ready  to  go  if  the 
Archbishop  of  York  advises  it — privately,  of  course. 
The  Archbishop,  to  whom  I  have  written  most 
fully,  is  coming  to  London  on  Wednesday  for  two 
days,  so  I  shall  see  him.  He  is  quite  ready  to 
write  the  letter  we  want  to  be  prefixed  to  "  Puller's 
admirable  article."1 


1  This  letter  was  printed  as  preface  to  Fr.  Puller's  pamphlet,  Les 
Ordinations  Anglicanes  et  le  Sacrifice  de  la  Messe. 


LETTERS  89 

T.  A.  L.  to  the  Bishop  of  Ely. 

March  27,  1896. 

Enclosed  are  some  letters  which  I  will  ask  you  to 
look  over.  You  will  see  from  them  that  the  Com- 
mission of  Cardinals1  at  Rome  which  is  considering 
the  question  of  Anglican  Orders  is  busily  at  work, 
and  Duchesne  and  Gasparri,  who  are  appointed  by 
the  Pope  as  consultors,  are  insisting  on  having  help 
and  advice  from  us,  asking  especially  for  me  and 
Fr.  Puller. 

I  went  up  to  London  on  Wednesday  to  see  Lord 
Halifax,  Fr.  Puller,  and  M.  Portal.  The  Arch- 
bishop of  York  was  called  away. 

Fr.  Puller  and  I  have  conditionally  agreed  to  go, 
but  we  have  declined  to  write  the  letter  to  the  Pope 
suggested  to  us,  asking  in  some  sort  of  way  for 
audience.  We  can  go  only  as  friends  of  Gas- 
parri and  Duchesne,  to  advise  them  and  give 
them  information.  Anything  more  would  look  too 
much  like  a  recognition  of  the  right  of  the  Roman 
Church  to  decide  the  question.  For  a  like  reason 
it  was  unanimously  agreed  that  we  should  not  ask 
for  letters  testimonial  from  our  diocesans  ;  though 
such  letters  would  be  strictly  en  regle>  yet  they 
might  be  misrepresented  as  commissioning  us  to 
represent  the  English  Episcopate. 

I  am  advised,  however,  to  ask  one  favour  from 
your  Lordship.  It  is  uncertain  how  long  I  may  be 
detained,  and  I  therefore  ask  for  leave  of  absence 
from  my  parish.  It  has  been  suggested  that  I 

1  So  I  wrote,  whether  from  inadvertence  or  from  ignorance  I  do 
not  remember. 


go     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

should  ask  you  to  give  me  a  letter  in  Latin  setting 
out  briefly  the  facts,  that  some  theologians  in  Rome 
(omitting  all  reference  to  the  Commission),  who  are 
discussing  grave  matters  affecting  the  relations  of  the 
Roman  and  English  Churches,  have  asked  me  to  go 
there  and  help  them  with  information,  and  on  that 
account  granting  me  leave  of  absence.  It  has  been 
suggested  that  if  such  a  letter  might  be  shown 
privately  it  would  produce  considerable  effect  as 
indicating  approval  of  our  proceedings  broadly, 
without  in  the  least  compromising  the  English 
Episcopate  by  anything  we  may  say  or  do, 
judiciously  or  injudiciously.  Fr.  Puller  will,  of 
course,  take  actual  directions  from  his  immediate 
Superior. 

M.  Portal  has  ventured  to  say  that  if  we  took 
formal  credentials,  that  fact  of  itself  would  probably 
prevent  any  actual  decision  of  the  question  in  an 
adverse  sense,  but  this  does  not  seem  to  us  a  suffi- 
cient reason  for  so  dangerously  compromising  the 
independence  of  our  Church.  On  the  other  hand, 
such  a  letter  as  I  ask  for  would  certainly  produce 
some  effect  in  the  same  direction,  and  would  be 
free  from  danger. 

The  object  which  Fr.  Puller  and  I  set  before 
ourselves  is  not  to  obtain  a  favourable  decision,  but 
to  hinder  the  giving  of  any  decision  at  all. 


LETTERS  91 


The  Rev.  F.   W.  Puller  to  T.  A.  L. 

March  27,  1896. 

No  doubt  Lord  Halifax  will  have  told  you  that 
the  Archbishop  of  York  has  promised  to  write 
a  letter  to  Portal,  which  he  will  be  able  to  show 
"in  the  proper  quarter."  If  the  letter  is  a  good 
one,  this  will  have  an  excellent  effect. 

Will  you  let  me  know  what  books  you  will  be 
able  to  take  with  you,  so  that  I  may  not  take 
needless  duplicates  ? 

The  Archbishop  of  York  was  very  strong  on  the 
duty  of  going  to  Rome,  and  he  solemnly  blessed 
me  with  a  view  to  the  enterprise. 


The  Rev.  F.    W.  Puller  to  T.  A.  L. 

March  30,  1896. 
***** 

Very  probably  you  will  think  of  a  number  of 
other  books  which  we  ought  to  take  with  us.  I 
have  not  put  down  great  Roman  books,  like 
Franzelin,  Thomassinus,  Bossuet,  De  Lugo,  etc., 
because  we  shall,  I  suppose,  be  able  to  get  at  such 
books  easily  in  Rome. 

***** 

Probably  it  will  not  be  desirable  for  us  to  be 
presented  to  the  Pope.  It  may  be  well,  however, 
to  be  provided  with  whatever  is  necessary,  in  case  it 
should  seem  to  be  desirable.  I  have  no  idea  what 
etiquette  requires  for  such  an  occasion.  In  England 
I  believe  that  a  priest  goes  to  Court  in  cassock 


and  academical  dress,  i.e.  I  suppose,  in  cap,  gown, 
and  hood.  Can  you  throw  any  light  on  these 
vestiary  matters  ? 


The  Bishop  of  Ely  to  T.  A.  L. 

March  30,  1896. 

I  find  it  is  as  I  thought.  I  cannot  grant  you 
license  of  non-residence  (save  for  sickness  and 
certain  other  specified  causes)  without  the  approval 
of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 

I  will  ask  his  Grace  for  his  approval.  If  he 
refuses  it,  you  can  at  any  rate  go — unlicensed — for 
three  months,  and  I  will  not  summon  you  back  into 
residence  till  you  have  finished  your  work. 


Lord  Halifax  to  T.  A.  L. 

Easter  Eve,  1896. 
#  *  #  #  * 

The  Archbishop  of  York  has  written  quite  a 
good  letter  as  a  preface  to  Father  Puller's  Articles. 
In  it  he  absolutely  endorses  Father  Puller's  inter- 
pretation of  Article  XXXI.  Altogether  it  is 
marvellous.  Two  English  ecclesiastics,  one  a 
religious,  sent  to  Rome  with  the  approbation  and 
consent  of  the  Archbishop  of  York  and  others  to 
confer  with  representatives  of  His  Holiness.  It  is 
marvellous  in  our  eyes  :  God's  work,  and  no  one 
else's  ;  and  therefore  not  to  be  talked  about.  Only 
to  be  thanking  Him  and  praying  Him  for  a  good 
success  every  moment  of  the  day. 


LETTERS 


The  Bishop  of  Ely  to  T.  A.  L. 

April  10,  1896. 

As  I  told  you,  I  can  only  grant  a  license  for  non- 
residence  (except  in  the  cases  of  sickness,  etc., 
specified  in  the  Act)  with  the  consent  of  the  Arch- 
bishop, and  he  will  not  grant  one  until  a  clergyman 
has  exhausted  the  three  months  he  can  be  away 
from  his  benefice  without  license.  So  I  fear  you 
must  make  your  journey  with  nothing  to  show  for 
it,  unless  and  until  it  exceeds  three  months,  when 
you  can  write  to  me  again.  But  I  think,  under  the 
circumstances,  you  had  better  stay  away  as  long  as 
is  necessary  unlicensed. 


Rev.  J.  R.  Lunn  to  T.  A.  L, 

April  ii. 

Mr.  Wood  telegraphed  to  me  from  Cambridge, 
asking  me  to  send  you  the  manuscript  copy  I  have 
just  made  of  Barlowe's  Dialogue.  I  do  so.  I  have 
made  a  few  hurried  notes,  which  I  thought  would  be 
useful. 

TV  TV  *A~  TV*  TV 

I  take  Barlow's  celebrated  statement  to  mean 
that,  so  far  as  entering  the  episcopate  is  concerned, 
a  Royal  nomination  is  as  good  as  a  Papal  Bull. 
And  I  take  his  Answer  to  mean  that  Unction  is  not 
part  of  the  matter  of  the  Sacrament  of  Order, 
is  not  to  be  found  in  N.T.,  and  therefore  is  not 
necessary.  But  Appointment  is  ;  and  what  appoint- 
ment consists  in  he  does  not  specify,  but  supposes 
it  well  known. 


94     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


The  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood  to  T.  A.  L. 

April  n,  1896. 

I  have  referred  to  Wilkins  about  Pole's  Legatine 
Constitutions.  The  words  are  : — 

"  Et  quia  contra  Capitis  Ecclesiae  et  Sacra- 
mentorum  doctrinam  potissimum  hie  erratum  est, 
placuit  doctrinam  de  Primatu  Ecclesiae  Romanae 
et  de  Septem  Sacramentis,  quae  in  Concilio 
Generali  Florentiae  sub  Eugenio  quarto  explicata 
est  huic  decreto  subjicere." 

Pole  also  orders  Peckham's  Constitution  as  to 
Tabernacles  to  be  appended.  But  neither  in  the 
Corpus  nor  in  the  Cotton  MS.  is  either  decree  or 
constitution  set  out  in  full.  But  it  appears  to  me 
that  he  is  as  much  committed  to  the  doctrine  as  to 
the  Instruments  as  if  the  decree  were  set  out  in  full. 


T.  A.  L.  to  the  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood. 

14  April)  1896. 

Your  bibliography  of  Barlow's  Dialogue  has 
arrived,  and  is  in  a  way  disappointing;  1531  is 
rather  too  early  a  date  for  our  purpose.  I  should 
like  to  know  if  there  are  any  variations  in  the  two 
editions.  If  so,  the  new  matter  or  the  omissions 
would  be  very  significant. 

We  have  been  working  pretty  hard.  Duchesne 
and  Gasparri  come  to  us  for  three  hours  at  a  time. 
Scannell  also  has  called  on  us  and  invited  us  to  the 
English  College,  and  offered  to  place  any  books  at 
our  disposal.  *  *  Moyes  has 


LETTERS  95 

prepared  a  vast  memoir,  which  is  being  treated 
as  the  basis  of  the  discussion.  They  ask  him 
whether  he  expects  to  stay  in  Rome  till  next 
spring ;  but  it  is  hoped  that  Cardinal  Mazzella 
will  rule  most  of  the  matter  out  as  irrelevant. 
*  De  Augustinis  was  put  on  the 
Commission  after  presenting  to  the  Pope  a  memoir 
in  favour  of  validity.  He  is,  I  believe,  the  first 
Jesuit  who  has  taken  this  line,  and  he  is  the  leading 
professor  at  the  Collegio  Romano.  * 

Duchesne  is  absolutely  convinced  that  we  have 
made  out  our  case  for  the  tacit  reception  of  the 
Edwardine  Orders  by  Pole,  in  spite  of  the  second 
Legatine  Constitution.  That  means  of  course  that 
the  Decretum  ad  Armenos  was  not  taken  to  define 
what  is  essential  for  Orders,  but  merely  what  was 
customary — the  view  of  d'Annibale.  I  have  found 
Wilkins  at  the  Biblioteca  Nazionale — the  old  Jesuits' 
Library. 

So  far  they  have  established  only  one  thing  at 
the  Commission — that  Ferrar  was  consecrated  by 
the  Pontifical.  Of  course  that  has  an  important 
bearing  on  the  question  of  the  Degradations l ; 
but  the  immediate  object  of  the  discussion  was  a 
trivial  one.  They  were  settling  the  meaning  of  the 
Bull  of  Paul  IV.  Gasparri  had  raised  his  question 
about  the  words  or  dines  non  sacros.  What  Bishop 
consecrated  by  the  Ordinal  had  ever  conferred 
ordines  non  sacros  ?  Moyes  replied,  Ferrar.  So 
the  question  of  his  consecration  came  up ;  we  gave 
Gasparri  all  the  particulars,  and  while  doing  so  we 
came  across  the  important  fact — unknown  to  either 

1  See  above,  Diary,  April  10,  note ;  and  de  Hierarchia  Anglicana, 
pp.  160-3. 


96     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

of  us  before — that  according  to  the  Sarum  Pontifical 
the  consecration  of  a  Bishop  took  place  before  the 
beginning  of  Mass  —  precisely  the  arrangement 
which  in  Ferrar's  case  was  challenged  by  Estcourt 
as  an  irregularity.  We  found  this  in  Maskell,  and 
of  course  it  was  conclusive. 

We  have  found  out  exactly  what  the  Commission 
is.  It  is  a  body  of  consultores  to  the  Holy  Office, 
Cardinal  Mazzella  presiding.  They  will  report  to 
the  Holy  Office,  but  it  is  said  that  the  Pope  is 
going  to  reserve  the  whole  matter  to  himself.  So 
we  may  tell  our  horror-stricken  friends  in  England 
that  we  are  in  immediate  touch  with  the  familiars 
of  the  Inquisition.  Nay  more,  we  went  down  to- 
day with  two  of  them — Duchesne  and  Scannell — 
into  the  catacomb  of  St.  Priscilla,  and  emerged 
with  life  and  limb !  Morever,  we  had  Canon  Bright 
with  us.  Also  a  Jesuit,  le  pere  Lapotre,  who  wears 
a  pointed  beard,  and  looks  like  a  most  respectable 
country  parson.  Le  pere 

Lapdtre  is  the  author  of  a  book  on  John  VIII, 
and  he  is  just  doing  Formosus,  so  he  is  an  authority 
on  reordination. 

At  the  old  Jesuits'  Library  they  have  singularly 
few  English  books  of  the  seventeenth  century. 
Of  Beveridge  only  the  Apostolic  Canons  ;  of  Pear- 
son only  the  Creed  in  a  vile  Latin  translation  and 
the  little  posthumous  volume  of  chronologica ;  of 
Barrow  nothing  but  the  mathematical  treatises ; 
of  Hammond  and  Field  nothing.  In  the  Vatican 
Library  Fr.  Puller  has  found  a  nice  little  surprise 
for  our  friends.  The  Bishop  of  Oxford  had  told 
him  of  another  copy  of  the  famous  letter  of  June  12, 
1536,  which  is  printed  in  Gairdner's  Letters  and 


LETTERS  97 

Papers  of  Henry  VIII,  vol.  10.  He  went  to  the 
Vatican  Library  to  verify  it,  and  finds  that  instead 
of  describing  Barlow  as  "  Bishop  then  elect  of 
St.  Asaph,  now  elect  of  St.  David's,"  as  in  Est- 
court's  copy,  it  runs  "  Bishop  then  elect  of  St.  Asaph, 
now  of  St.  David's."  Now  if  this  is  the  corrected 
copy,  of  which  Estcourt's  paper  was  a  draft,  the 
alteration  is  most  significant ;  it  almost  establishes 
June  n,  Haddan's  conjecture,  as  the  date  of  the 
consecration.  The  draft  made  before  the  conse- 
cration required  correction.  P.  has  written  to  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford  to  consult  him  on  the  subject.1 

We  have  not,  so  far,  the  slightest  indication  of 
the  time  that  will  be  occupied,  but  they  are  begin- 
ning to  talk  ominously  of  the  difficulties  which  the 
heat  of  June  is  likely  to  raise  if  it  is  not  finished  by 
then! 

The  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood  to  T.  A.  L. 

April  15,  1896. 
*  #  #  #  # 

A  line  of  argument  strikes  me ;  viz.  that  the 
compilers  of  the  Ordinal  intended  to  make  the 
Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum  and  the  accompanying 
imposition  of  hands  the  form  and  matter  of  ordi- 
nation to  the  priesthood,  or,  as  we  might  say,  the 
actual  and  essential  ceremony  of  Ordination  ;  and 
that  they  did  so  because  they  really  desired  to  come 
as  closely  as  possible  to  what  they  read  in  Scripture 
as  to  Ordination.  Bear  in  mind  the  prevailing  idea 
of  being  Scriptural.  If  so,  it  is  clear  evidence 
of  their  intention  to  do  what  our  LORD  did,  and  to 

1  See  Diary,  April  I7th,  and  Letters  of  May  i8th  and  24th. 
H 


98     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

perpetuate  the  ministry  He  had  instituted.  They 
may  more  or  less  have  misconceived  the  nature  of 
that  ministry,  but  that  would  not  invalidate  their 
intention.  Given  an  honest  desire  (i)  to  follow  our 
LORD'S  institution,  (2)  to  perpetuate  the  ministry  He 
had  instituted,  (3)  to  follow  as  closely  as  possible  in 
so  doing  the  evidence  of  Scripture,  surely  we  must 
grant  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  do  so  more 
admirably  than  this  is  done  in  our  Ordinal.  The 
idea  of  ordination  presented  to  us  in  Scripture  is 
far  more  clearly  actualized  in  our  Ordinal  than 
in  any  other  Rite.  To  call  such  a  Rite  invalid  seems 
to  me  on  broad  grounds  a  kind  of  wantonness,  a 
thing  akin  to  a  cynical  scepticism.  The  historical 
argument  as  to  the  Accipe  does  not  affect  the 
point. 

The  Rev.  Edward  Denny  to  T.  A.  L. 

17  April,  1896. 

Would  it  be  possible  for  some  one  to  look  at  the 
manuscript  speech  of  O'Harte1  in  the  Vatican  ?  I 
wonder  whether  it  is  the  sole  speech  he  made 
on  the  subject.  I  think  also  the  records  relating 
to  the  committee  appointed  by  the  Council  of 
Trent  to  consider  the  canons  suggested  by  the  Cardi- 
nal of  Lorraine  (vide  Paleotto,  Act.  C.  T.,  pp.  359-61, 
quoted  De  Hierarchies,  n.  253)  should  be  examined, 
if  possible.  I  still  find  a  difficulty  in  understanding 
how  Paleotto  could  have  based  the  statement  he 

1  This  Irish  bishop  is  reported  by  Le  Plat  and  Raynald,  on  the 
authority  of  Paleotto,  to  have  said  in  the  Council  of  Trent  that  the 
only  valid  argument  against  the  English  bishops  was  "  quia  non  sunt 
a  Pontifice  Romano  adsciti?  Dom  Gasquet  found  in  the  Archives  a 
manuscript  report  of  the  speech  that  does  not  bear  out  this  interpreta- 
tion. 


LETTERS  99 

did  about  O'Harte's  speech  on  the  manuscript 
discovered  by  Dom  Gasquet,  considering  the  posi- 
tion which  he  occupied  at  the  Council  as  Auditor, 
and  also  how  the  committee  of  nine  (amongst 
whom  was  Paleotto)  could  have  worded  their  fourth 
reason  for  rejecting  the  canon  numbered  vii.  in  the 
way  they  did,  if  O'Harte  merely  said  what  Dom 
Gasquet's  manuscript  contains.1 

Duchesne's  opinion  about  the  Marian  praxis  is 
interesting.  I  suppose  he  regards  the  Paul  IV 
documents  in  the  same  light  as  Scannell.  I  am 
glad  Scannell  is  on  the  Commission.  I  was  struck 
with  his  first  letter  to  the  Tablet  on  those  documents. 
He  seems  to  have  a  clearer  head  than  Moyes. 


T.  A.  L.  to  the  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood. 

25  April,  1896. 


Last  Monday  we  spent  a  very  pleasant  evening 
with  the  Sulpicians,  who,  it  seems,  are  very  conser- 
vative and  rather  distrustful  of  Portal,  but  they 
were  most  pleasant  and  friendly  and  full  of  inquiries 
about  our  ways  and  doings  in  England.  We  have 
had  some  long  sittings,  all  about  Barlow  ;  but  they 
are  now  getting  on  to  the  rite,  and  things  will 
be  more  interesting.  We  have  had  the  memoir  of 
de  Augustinis,  and  it  proved  exciting  reading.  *  *  * 
The  general  purport  of  the  memoir  has  leaked  out 
through  an  amazing  indiscretion  of  Cardinal 

1  It  was  found  impossible  to  act  on  these  suggestions,  and  I  there- 
fore withdrew,  in  my  Supplementum,  the  arguments  that  we  had  based 
in  De  Hierarchies  on  Paleotto's  report.  Mr.  Denny  and  I  had  pre- 
viously made  a  similar  withdrawal  in  a  Monitum  attached  to  copies 
of  our  book. 


ioo     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Vaughan's  at  St.  Joseph's,  Mill  Hill,  about  which 
news  speedily  reached  Rome ;  and  it  has  made  the 
greatest  impression.  • 

The  Gordon  case,  on  examination,  presents  some 
unlocked  for  features.  The  Holy  Office,  so  far 
from  pronouncing  on  Gordon's  Supplied,  as  the 
published  accounts  implied,  seems  to  have  brushed 
his  flimsy  reasons  aside  altogether,  and  with  the 
rite  fairly  before  them,  to  have  concluded  that 
Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum  was  the  sole  form 
employed,  and  that  it  was  insufficient,  not  being  a 
prayer.  The  near  conjunction  of  this  decision  with 
the  votum  of  the  Consultores  in  the  Abyssinian 
case  must  stand  as  one  of  the  puzzles  of  history. 
The  result  is  that,  as  Duchesne  was  showing  me 
last  night,  they  cannot  in  the  Commission  argue  on 
the  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum  at  all,  as  they  cannot 
go  behind  a  decision  of  the  Holy  Office.  Duchesne 
and  de  Augustinis  accept  the  prayer  in  the  priests' 
Ordination  as  oratio  super  ordinandos,  on  the 
ground  of  the  words  "as  well  by  these  thy  minis- 
ters," but  the  others  either  deny  or  doubt  this.  We 
shall,  I  think,  have  a  good  tussle  over  the  oneness 
of  the  rite.  Moyes  boldly  attacks  de  Lugo,  or 
rather  I  should  say  Fr.  David  does,  for  it  seems  he 
is  the  theologian. 

The  other  great  lion  in  the  way  is  the  reluctance 
to  disturb  the  existing  internal  practice  about  Ordina- 
tions, and  with  this  a  reluctance  to  define  what  the 
Council  of  Trent  deliberately  left  open.  I  have 
been  arguing  that  the  acceptance  of  Greek  Orders 
has  practically  done  the  latter,  but  of  course  it 
does  not  affect  the  former  question,  since  Greek 
uniat  priests  are  not  allowed  to  officiate  with  the 


LETTERS  101 

Latin  rite.  *  *  *  I  have  suggested  ^.proprio  motu, 
in  which  the  Pope  seems  to  be  able  to  talk  about 
any  subject  whatever,  so  that  he  might  recognize 
the  validity  as  a  theological  fact,  while  ordering  for 
practical  reasons  either  the  supply  of  the  porrection, 
or  conditional  reordination,  for  any  who  may  seek 
permission  to  exercise  their  ministry  in  the  Roman 
Church.  There  is  also  the  practical  question  of  the 
minor  orders  and  the  subdiaconate.  One  can  easily 
see  that  it  would  be  intolerable  to  treat  us  in  these 
respects  more  favourably  than  Latins  themselves. 

The  Pope  seems  to  be  wonderfully  eager.  Gas- 
parri  saw  him  yesterday  and  told  him  how  useful  we 
were  being.  He  added  some  not  very  well  chosen 
words  about  "  Anglicans  "  being  "  all  but  Catholics," 
and  "at  the  very  door."  "  Je  vais  1'ouvrir  a  deux 
battants,"  cried  the  Pope  with  vivacity.  Well,  in 
that  case,  one  leaf  at  all  events  must  be  the  recog- 
nition of  Orders.  I  am  pressing  everywhere  the 
point  that  a  definite  ruling  for  conditional  reordina- 
tion, though  it  would  not  really  close  the  door, 
would  make  it  impossible  for  us  to  do  much  for 
reunion,  since  our  people  would  all  be  persuaded 
that  we  were  intending  every  one,  from  the  Arch- 
bishops downwards,  to  be  reordained. 


T.  A.  L.  to  the  Rev.  W.  H.  Frere. 

April  29,  1896. 

Will  you  undertake  a  certain  search  for  us  ? 

Moyes  has  been  building  up  an  elaborate  argu- 
ment against  Barlow  by  showing  that  all  the  docu- 
ments relating  to  his  appointment  are  extant,  and 


102     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

all  relating  to  consecration  are  wanting.  We  have 
pretty  well  riddled  it  by  showing  that  his  "docu- 
ment "  for  the  enthronization,  for  instance,  is  a  mere 
vague  allusion  in  a  private  letter,  and  that  in  order 
to  produce  the  Breve  de  restitutione  he  has  to  con- 
fuse it  with  the  Concessio.  I  further  challenged  the 
existence  of  the  Conge"  and  the  Assent,  knowing 
they  were  not  on  the  Patent  Rolls.  Moyes  averred 
their  existence.  He  was  asked  by  Gasparri  for  a 
reference.  He  gave  "  Patent  Rolls,  27  Henry  8, 
p.  i,  m.  ii."  Now  this  is  the  reference  for 
the  St.  Asaph  election,  and  he  had  already 
given  it  as  such  in  his  article  in  the  Tablet.  He 
was  confronted  with  this,  whereupon  he  said  it 
was  a  mistake,  and  showed  that  elsewhere  in  the 
same  article  he  spoke  of  the  St.  David's  docu- 
ments as  extant.  That  was  true,  but  he  gave  no 

reference. 

***** 

We  then  telegraphed  to  Wood,  who  went 
to  the  Records  and  found  that  the  Conge  and 
Assent,  though  missing  from  the  Patent  Rolls,  are 
extant  in  their  preliminary  form  in  the  Privy  Seals 
and  Signed  Bills. 

***** 

A  special  request  from  Gasparri.  The  Literae 
certijicatoriae  from  the  Archbishop  to  the  King 
declaring  the  fact  of  the  Consecration,  are  they  pre- 
served anywhere  in  the  Records?  And  if  so,  is  the 
collection  complete  ?  They  are,  you  know,  gener- 
ally entered  in  the  Register,  and  they  are  usually 
recited  in  the  Writ  for  Restitution ;  but  I  do  not 
know  whether  the  originals  are  filed  anywhere. 


LETTERS  103 


T.  A.  L.  to  the  Rev.  E.   G.    Wood. 

29  Aj>.,  1896. 

I  wonder  if  you  made  out  the  drift  of  our  tele- 
gram. Moyes  has  been  building  up  an  elaborate 

argument,  etc.1 

#=  *  *  *  * 

When  this  was  reported  I  telegraphed  to  you. 
What  Gasquet  had  seen  was  of  course  what  is 
in  the  Privy  Seals.  I  am  ashamed  to  say  I  did 
not  know  these  were  kept,  though  I  was  studying 
not  long  since  the  process  of  issuing  Letters  Patent 
under  the  Great  Seal.  *  *  * 

We  called  with  Duchesne  on  Cardinal  Hohenlohe 
yesterday.  The  old  gentleman  was  most  kind  and 
cordial.  He  is  now  Archpriest  of  Santa  Maria 
Maggiore,  and  lives  in  a  cramped  appartement  in  the 
palace  of  the  Basilica.  If  only  he  could  replace 
Cardinal  Mazzella,  says  N.,  our  affairs  would  soon 
be  settled  satisfactorily. 

"rt*  TT  "A"  *rt*  TT 

Lord  Halifax  writes  to  Portal  that  he  has  seen 
the  Bishop  of  Clifton,  thinking  it  might  be  useful, 
and  that  the  bishop  said,  among  other  things, 
"  You  cannot  imagine  what  would  be  the  effect  on 
our  people  of  requiring  them  to  believe  that  persons 
who  have  no  belief  at  all  in  the  real  presence  can 
have  the  power  of  consecrating  the  Eucharist ! " 
Well  may  our  friends  here  say  that  they  do  not 
understand  the  theology  of  the  "  English  Catholics." 
Apparently  they  teach  that  the  orthodoxy  of  the 

1  Continues  almost  word  for  word  as  in  the  preceding  letter. 


104     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

priest  is  essential  to  the  validity  of  the  Sacrament. 
Now  one  can  appreciate  their  ideas  about  intention 
in  the  collation  of  Orders. 


The  Rev.  W.  H.  Frere  to  T.  A.  L. 

4  May,  1896. 

I  am  on  my  way  back  from  the  Record  Office 
where  I  have  been  on  your  errand.  I  must  write 
the  result  in  the  train  to  avoid  delay. 

I  have  been  through  the  Privy  Seals  and  Signed 
Bills  of  June  and  July :  they  are  all  calendared  in 
Vols.  X  and  XI  of  the  Domestic  Papers,  and  I  find 
nothing  much  of  interest.  I  went  carefully  through 
the  records  of  Warton  of  St.  Asaph  as  Barlow's  suc- 
cessor :  and  Sampson  and  Repps.  The  Archbishop's 
certificate  of  consecration  exists  only  for  the  latter, 
and  is  filed  in  this  collection  :  others  would  be  here 
were  they  forthcoming.  It  says  nothing  about 
Sampson  nor  Barlow. 

But  one  point  comes  out  from  these  documents : 
in  the  Royal  Assent  for  Warton,  i.e.  the  Privy  Seal 
and  Signed  Bill  (both)  issued  preliminary  to  the 
Letters  Patent,  the  Vacancy  is  described  as  being 
"  Per  liberam  transmutacionem  Will.  Barl.  ultimi 
episcopi  ibidem  electi."  This  last  word  does  not 
occur  in  the  analogous  document  of  Assent  to 
Sampson,  which  has — "  Roberti  Shirburn  ultimi 
epi  ibidem "  only.  This,  so  far  as  it  goes,  is 
evidence  that  Barlow  was  not  yet  consecrated  on 
June  I6.1 

1  Hardly  so.  It  only  shows  that  Barlow  was  not  consecrated 
before  his  avoidance  of  St.  Asaph.  See  below,  Letter  of  May  8th  to 
W.  H.  F. 


LETTERS  105 

I  will  look  up  in  Rymer  the  Letters  Patent  which 
issued  as  the  result  of  this  Privy  Seal  document, 
and  see  if  they  throw  any  further  light.  This  is  all 
I  have  to  report.  It  will  answer  Gasparri's  question 
about  Archbishop's  certificates. 

But  here  is  a  new  point  which  has  a  double 
bearing.  In  the  Register  of  the  Dean  and  Chapter 
of  Canterbury  Sede  Vacante  after  Cranmer's  at- 
tainder, a  valuable  list  is  given  of  the  Bishops 
deprived  and  the  causes. 

Defect  of  order  is  alleged  against  some,  but  not 
against  Barlow  :  the  cause  there  given  is  merely  his 
resignation.  In  the  other  cases  several  reasons  are 
given  against  the  same  person,  e.g.  marriage  or 
defective  title  because  of  the  quamdiu  clause  :  it 
would  have  been  easy  to  add  defect  of  order  in 
Barlow's  case  if  it  had  been  a  reason  felt  to  exist. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  would  have  been  easy  also 
to  allege  marriage.  Valeat  quantum. 

It  confirms  my  conviction  that  in  the  first  blush 
of  Marian  revulsion  they  were  inclined  to  dispute 
the  Orders  of  the  English  Ordinal  (you  have  no 
doubt  seen  my  letter  to  Fr.  Puller) ;  but  I  am 
coming  to  suspect  more  and  more,  and  hope  to 
prove,  that  this  doubt  was  a  steadily  diminishing 
quantity ;  possibly  even  that  the  influence  of  Pole, 
or  even  of  Rome,  was  exerted  against  it,  and  that 
the  reordination  which  prevailed  in  the  early  months 
was  afterwards  discouraged.  I  cannot  say  this  is 
proved :  but  I  see  increasing  hopes  that  it  may  be 
proved  when  I  have  got  and  digested  all  the 
evidence. 


106     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


From  the  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood  to  T.  A.  L. 

May  6,  1896. 

I  send  you  four  documents,  which  I  have  marked 
A,  B,  C,  D.  The  most  important  of  these  is  A. 
I  have  transcribed  it  on  a  piece  of  paper  the  exact 
size  of  the  parchment  and  line  for  line,  and  put  the 
King's  signature  in  the  exact  place.  This  is  what 
is  commonly  called  the  Assent  to  Barlow's  election 
to  St.  David's.  Now  observe  this  is  the  actual 
original  with  the  King's  autograph  signature.  It 
is  the  very  document  which  the  King  himself  had 
to  do  with.  It  is  the  Sign  Manual,  or  Signed  Bill. 
It  is  the  foundation  of  all  the  other  documents 
which  followed,  up  to  the  actual  letters  patent  with 
the  Great  Seal  attached,  which  reached  Cranmer. 
This  Sign  Manual  unquestionably  directs  the  Con- 
secration of  Barlow. 

3nr  TV  T?  TV~  *JF 

The  Privy  Seal  is  commonly  called  the  Signifi- 
cavit.  It  is  not  a  fresh  act  of  the  Royal  authority  ; 
it  is  contained,  as  it  were,  in  the  one  act  of  Royal 
authority,  viz.  the  Sign  Manual.  That  is  to  say, 
the  Privy  Seal  followed  necessarily  and  automati- 
cally on  the  Sign  Manual.  The  whole  routine  is 
fixed.  Two  copies  were  made  of  the  Privy  Seal. 
One  ends,  "  Per  breve  sub  sigillo  private."  This 
was  intended  to  be  on  record  at  the  Privy  Seal 
Office.  The  other  ended,  "  Sub  Sigillo  Private," 
and  had  the  Seal  actually  attached.  Moreover,  it 
contained  a  preface  addressed  to  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor, directing  him  to  issue  the  Letters  Patent 
under  the  Great  Seal.  All  these  documents  differed 


LETTERS  107 

slightly  from  one  another,  but  they  were  all  founded 
on  the  Sign  Manual,  which  contained  implicitly 
everything  contained  in  the  succeeding  documents, 
which,  as  I  have  said,  were  only  routine  expansions 
according  to  common  form. 

*  *  *  *  * 

I  think  it  very  important  to  insist  on  all  this,  so 
as  to  enable  our  friends  to  see  that  document  A  is 
verily  and  indeed  the  royal  mandate  to  confirm  and 
consecrate  Barlow.  Remember  that  in  all  grants 
(and  these  documents  are  technically  grants)  nothing 
but  the  Litterae  Patentes,  or  in  other  cases  the 
Litterae  Clausae,  went  beyond  the  official  precincts. 
But  the  whole  series  is  one.  The  germ  is  the 
Signed  Bill ;  then  there  is  a  process  of  evolution,  the 
ultimate  product  which  alone  sees  the  light,  being 
the  Letters  Patent  or  Letters  Close.  There  is  only 
one  act,  viz.  the  Royal  signature  to  the  Signed  Bill. 
That  is,  so  to  say,  the  efficient  cause,  and  it  was 
given  only  once  until  we  come  to  the  Restitution  of 
Temporalities,  which  starts  a  fresh  series. 

"JP  "fi?  vv*  vv  T? 

As  to  Gordon's  case,  I  wish  you  could  get  copies 
of  the  records.  The  decree  certainly  says  nothing 
about  the  validity  of  the  rite.  The  document  as 
reproduced  by  Lee,  p.  301,  from  the  Weekly 
Register,  first  recites  Gordon's  memorial,  and  then 
concludes  : — 

"  Lecto  supradicto  memoriali  SS.D.  noster  Papa  prae- 
dictus,  auditis  votis  eorundem  Emm,  decrevit  quod 
praedictus  Joannes  Clemens  Gordon  orator  ex 
integro  ad  omnes  ordines  etiam  sacros  et  presby- 
teratus  promoveatur,  et  quatenus  non  fuerit  sacra- 
mento  confirmationis  munitus  confirmetur." 


io8     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Now  of  course  the  present  Consultors  cannot  go 
behind  a  decree  of  H.O.,  but  surely  they  are  not 
bound  by  the  vota.  But  would  it  not  be  possible 
to  beg  that  these  vota,  or  rather  copies  of  them, 
might  be  produced,  that  we  might  have  the 
benefit  of  studying  them  ?  The  more  one  thinks 
of  it,  the  more  intensely  difficult  does  it  seem  to 
me  to  conceive  how  any  rite  in  Christendom  can  be 
valid  if  ours  is  not ;  it  so  clearly  bears  on  its  face 
the  evidence  of  the  purpose  to  confer  by  laying  on 
of  hands  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  make  the 
man  a  priest.  As  to  the  question  of  precatory  or 
imperative,  surely  this  is  just  on  all  fours  with  the 
same  question  in  regard  to  the  Sacrament  of 
Penance,  and  indeed  analogous  to  that  of  the 
Western  and  Eastern  form  in  Baptism. 

[Enclosures.] 

A. 

To  the  King  our  Sovereign  Lord. 

Pleaseth  it  your  highness  of  your  most  noble  and 
abundant  grace  to  grant  your  gracious  letters  patent 
under  your  great  seal  in  due  form  to  be  made  accord- 
ing to  the  tenour  ensuing. 

Henry  R. 

Rex  reverendissimo  in  Christo  patri  Thomae 
Cantuar.  archiepiscopo  totius  Angliae  primati  salu- 
tem.  Sciatis  quod  electioni  nuper  factae  in  ecclesia 
Cathedrali  Meneven.  per  mortem  bonae  memoriae 
dom.  Richardi  Rawlyns  ultimi  episcopi  ibidem 
vacante  de  reverendo  in  Christo  patre  dom.  Will- 
elmo  Barlow  sacrae  theologiae  professore  tune 
episcopo  Assaven.  et  Mon.  de  Bisham  Sarum  dioec. 


LETTERS  109 

commendatorio  perpetuo  in  episcopum  loci  illius  et 
pastorem  regium  assensum  adhibuimus  et  favorem, 
et  hoc  vobis  tenore  praesentium  significamus  ut  quod 
vestrum  est  in  hac  parte  exequamini.  In  cuius  etc. 
Teste  etc. 

B. 

Henricus  octauus  dei  gratia  Anglic  et  ffrancie 
Rex  fidei  defensor  et  dominus  Hibernie  ac  in  terra 
supremum  capud  ecclesie  anglicane  Predilecto  et 
fideli  Consiliario  nostro  Thome  Audeley  militi 
Cancellario  nostro  salutem.  Vobis  mandamus  quod 
sub  magno  sigillo  nostro  in  custodia  vestra  existen 
literas  nostras  patentes  fieri  faciatis  in  forma 
sequen.  Rex  etc.  dilectis  nobis  in  Christo  decano 
et  capitulo  ecclesie  cathedralis  Meneuefi  salutem. 
Ex  parte  vestra  nobis  est  humiliter  supplicat'  vt 
cum  ecclesia  vestra  predicta  per  mortem  bone 
memorie  domini  Richardi  Rawlyns  vltimi  episcopi 
ibidem  sit  pastoris  solacio  destituta  alium  vobis 
eligend'  in  episcopum  et  pastorem  licentiam  nostram 
concedere  dignaremur.  Nos  precibus  vestris  in  hac 
parte  fauorabiliter  inclinati  licentiam  illam  duximus 
concedend'  Mandantes  quod  talem  vobis  eligatis 
in  episcopum  et  pastorem  qui  deo  devotus  ecclesie 
vestre  necessarius  nobisque  et  Regno  nostro  vtilis  et 
fidelis  exist.  In  cuius  rei  etc.  Dat'  nostro  sub  Priuato 
sigillo  apud  Manerium  nostrum  de  West'  xxvif  die 
Marcii  Anno  regni  nostri  vicesimo  septimo. 

Extracted  at  Record  Office.  E.  G.  Wood,  Ap.  30, 
1896. 

This  is  the  Conge1  de" lire  for  Barlow  to  St.  David's. 
It  is  in  the  Privy  Seal  bundle  for  March. 
It  is  the  copy  sent  to  the  Chancery. 


no     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

c. 

Congd  de1  lire  for  Barlow  to  St.  Asaph. 

This  is  exactly  the  same  as  that  to  St.  David's 
mutatis  mutandis — so  it  is  not  worth  copying.  It 
is  on  the  Patent  Roll  27.  Hen.  VIII,  2  pt.  m.  20. 
(Rymer,  xiv.  570.)  It  is  dated  Jan.  7,  1536,  but 
on  the  Roll  it  is  placed  after  the  assent ;  it  imme- 
diately follows  it. 

A  Privy  Seal. 

D. 

Assent  to  Barlows  election  to  St.  Asaph. 

Rex  reverendo  in  Christo  patri  Thome  Cantuar' 
arch'  totius  Angliae  primati  Sciatis  quod  electioni 
nuper  factae  in  Ecclesia  Cathedrali  Assaph.  per 
mortem  bonae  memoriae  dom'  Henrici  Standish 
ultimi  episcopi  ibidem  vacante  de  venerabili  Will- 
elmo  Barlowe  priore  domus  sive  prioratus  de  Bisham 
ordinis  Sancti  Augustini  Sarum  dicecesis  in  epis- 
copum  loci  illius  et  pastorem  regium  assensum 
adhibemus  et  favorem.  Et  hoc  vobis  tenore  pre- 
sentium  significamus  ut  quod  vestrum  est  in  hac 
parte  exequamini.  In  cujus  &c.  Teste  Rege 
apud  Westm'  vicesimo  secundo  die  Februarii  (27 
Hy.  VIII,  2pt.  m.2O.  Rymer  xiv.  559). 

This  document  is  a  Privy  Seal. 


LETTERS  in 


Sir  Walter  Phillimore  to  T.  A.  L. 

May  7,  1896. 
##=### 

How  is  Bishop  Barlow  ?  As  to  mandate  for 
confirmation  and  consecration,  you  will  have  seen 
that  in  Gibson,  ed.  Oxford,  1761,  p.  1327,  the  pre- 
cedent given — a  late  one,  I  allow — temp.  Will.  3,  has 
Assent  and  the  Mandate  for  both  in  one  document. 

Oughton,  Or  do  judiciorum,  has  in  his  second 
volume  of  Formularies  no  instrument  as  to  conse- 
cration of  Bishops.  But  in  the  last  title  of  Vol.  II, 
Tit.  cccxxxvii.  (ed.  1738,  p.  482),  he  has  the  Forma 
conjirmandi  Episcopum,  which  begins  :  "  Imprimis 
.  .  .  praesententur  literae  commissionales  et  patentes 
regiae  de  assensu  regio  etc.  sub  Sigillo  Magno 
Angliae,  et  coram  eo  publice  leguntur."  These 
literae  commissionales  et  patentes  are  clearly  those 
of  Royal  assent  and  confirmation  :  that  they  include 
mandate  for  consecration  appears  from  p.  484, 
Observationes. 

(2)  "  Post   electionem    celebratam    et  .  .  .  signi- 
ficantur  haec  a  Decano  et  Capitulo  Regiae  Maies- 
tati  et  domino  Archiepiscopo. 

(3)  Deinde   rescribere   solet   Archiepiscopo   per 
literas    suas    patentes     Dominus    Rex    de   assensu 
Regio  eidem  electioni  adhibito  ;  una  cum  Mandate 
pro   Confirmatione   et  Consecratione   dicti   Domini 
Electi." 

This  is,  of  course,  no  earlier  in  date  than  the 
precedent  in  Gibson.  But  it  shows  that  form  to  be 
then  (and,  if  then,  probably  always)  the  usual  form. 
I  attach  importance  to  the  singular  mandato. 


ii2     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


T.  A.  L.  to  the  Rev.  W.  H.  Frere. 

May  8,  1896. 

Thank  you  very  much  for  your  note  about  the 
literae  certificatoriae,  which  is  just  what  was  wanted. 
The  best  thing  for  our  argument  would  have  been 
that  they  were  not  kept  at  all :  the  next  best,  that 
they  were  kept  carelessly.  The  absence  of  Samp- 
son's robs  the  absence  of  Barlow's  of  all  signifi- 
cance. 

Father  Puller  has  told  you  that  I  have  a  telegram 
from  Wood,  announcing  the  discovery  of  the  man- 
date to  consecrate  Barlow.  We  are  impatiently 
awaiting  a  letter  of  particulars.  This  completes 
the  demolition  of  Moyes'  case,  which  consisted  in 
showing  that  not  only  was  Barlow's  consecration 
not  mentioned  in  Cranmer's  Register,  but  that  also 
all  the  documents  in  which  it  might  have  been 
recorded  are  missing,  while  all  relating  to  his 
appointment,  apart  from  consecration,  are  extant. 
It  was  a  wonderful  scheme  of  documents  that  he 
showed.  The  missing  ones  were  five. 

i.   Mandate  to  consecrate. 

ii.   License  of  Chapter  of  Canterbury  to  conse- 
crate away  from  Canterbury, 
iii.   Register. 

iv.   Literae  certificatoriae. 
v.   Barlow's  own  Register  ; 

besides  possibly  commission  to  Bishop  to  consecrate, 
and  writ  of  restitution  if  that  was  granted  after 
consecration.  Moyes  graciously  waived  these,  as 


LETTERS  113 

there  was  not  the  ghost  of  a  reason  for  supposing 
that  either  ever  existed  or  could  have  existed. 

We  have  now  got  i.  ;  ii.  and  v.  are  known  to 
have  perished  ;  iv.  you  have  shown  to  afford  no 
presumption  ;  and  so  we  come  back  to  the  Register 
as  the  only  real  lacuna.1 

The  Canterbury  Register  giving  the  reasons  for 
deposition  of  Bishops  has  been  much  used.  N. 
transposed  the  entries,  so  as  to  make  it  appear  that 
"ut  supra'  in  each  case  included  the  "  invaliditatemi 
consecrationis"  We  exposed  this,  and  so  dealt  our 
first  severe  blow  at  his  credit. 

Observe  that  the  description  of  Barlow  as  ultimi 
episcopi  ibidem  electi — i.e.  of  St.  Asaph — proves 
nothing.  Since  he  certainly  was  not  consecrated 
to  St.  Asaph,  he  remained  always  ultimus  episcopus 
electus  of  that  see. 

I  should  very  much  like  to  know  what  are  the 
variations  between  the  Privy  Seal  for  the  Custodia 
of  St.  David's  and  the  Concessio  as  finally  given ; 
but  there  is  no  hurry  for  this  unless — which  is 
hardly  possible — it  should  afford  positive  evidence. 
Estcourt's  argument  from  the  terms  of  the  Con- 
cessio is  quite  given  up  even  by  Moves. 

Your  hypothesis  about  the  intervention  of  the 
Legate  to  stop  reordinations  is  most  interesting.  I 
will  tell  Duchesne  of  it,  subject,  of  course,  to  re- 
serves, and  not  for  use.  Our  prompt  production  of 
your  evidence  seems  to  have  made  a  very  good 
impression. 

1  We  were  at  this  time  under  the  impression  that  Mr.  Wood's  tele- 
gram announced  the  discovery  of  a  hitherto  unknown  document. 

2  The  word  used  was  nullitatem. 


ii4     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


T.  A.  L.  to  the  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood. 

10  May,  1896. 

Your  letter  with  the  documents  is  not  yet  come. 
The  telegram  about  the  mandate  of  consecration 
was  just  in  time  for  the  last  sitting  of  the  Com- 
mission, completing  the  demolition  of  Moyes'  case. 
The  last  sitting,  for  the  Commission  has  come  to 
an  abrupt  conclusion,  about  which  we  experience  a 
curiosity  which  is  not  gratified.  All  the  members 
have  their  mouths  shut,  and  are  forbidden  ever 
again  to  write  or  publish  anything  on  the  subject 
of  Anglican  Orders.  This  must  be  annoying  for 
Moyes.  Gasparri  is  very  content ;  he  is  heartily 
sick  of  the  whole  matter,  and  has  charged  Portal 
never  again  to  mention  the  Anglican  Church  to 
him.  It  is  wonderful  that,  being  so  little  interested 
in  the  question,  he  should  have  gone  into  it  so 
thoroughly.  Probably  he  will  not  lose  his  reward, 
for  he  is  likely  to  have  a  nunciature  before  long, 
and  the  purple  may  not  be  so  very  far  beyond 
that.1 

Well,  we  thought  of  packing  up  our  traps,  but  a 
message  from  Duchesne  stayed  us,  and  on  Friday 
he  went  to  see  Cardinal  Rampolla  to  talk  about 
us.  The  Cardinal  told  him  that  a  Commission  of 
Cardinals  was  nominated  to  take  over  the  question, 
and  it  was  most  important  that  we  should  stay  to 
give  our  help.  So  now,  if  you  please,  we  are  here 
not  by  invitation  of  Gasparri  and  Duchesne,  but  by 
command  of  the  Cardinal-Secretary.  He  added 

1  He  was  appointed  Delegate  Apostolic  for  Peru,  Ecuador,  and 
Bolivia  in  1898,  and  became  Cardinal  in  1907. 


LETTERS  115 

that  he  wanted  to  see  us,  but  we  must  call  on  some 
other  Cardinals  first.  Duchesne  suggested  some 
names — whether  proprio  motu  or  not  I  cannot  say 
— and  we  began  yesterday  with  Cardinal  Vincenzo 
Vannutelli,  whom  Portal  knew  as  Nuncio  at  Lisbon. 
He  was  most  effusive,  and  let  out  at  once  that  he 
was  on  the  Commission.  He  is  a  young  man,1  and 
talks  with  the  most  extraordinary  gesticulation,  his 
hands  flourishing  away  all  the  time  at  the  level  of 
his  eyes.  After  this  interview  I  telegraphed  for 
copies  of  de  Hierarchies,  which  we  shall  formally 
present  to  the  Cardinals.  I  am  also  setting  to  work 
on  a  small  supplement,  which  we  shall  print  here, 
dealing  with  later  developments  of  the  question.  I 
want  to  make  use  of  de  Augustinis'  suggestion 
about  the  forma,  and  of  course  I  must  not  let  it 
seem  that  I  have  seen  his  paper,  but  most  fortunately 
it  happens  that  Chase  has  suggested  the  same  idea 
to  me,  and  I  shall  quote  it  as  his. 

I  think — but  without  any  certainty — that  Gas- 
parri's  thesis  of  the  entire  unity  of  the  ordination 
rite,  and  the  consequent  sufficiency  of  one  or  other 
of  the  prayers  contained  therein  with  the  Imposi- 
tion of  hands,  has  prevailed  in  the  commission  of 
inquiry,  and  is  likely  to  prevail  elsewhere.  If  so  a 
real  advance  in  theology  will  be  made,  and  the 
whole  conception  of  ordination  will  become  much 
simpler.  They  were  very  anxious  to  know  if  the 
prayer  at  the  end  of  the  Litany  in  the  rite  for  conse- 
crating Bishops  is  invariably  said  by  the  consecrator 
himself,  and  we  have  obtained  from  the  Archbishop 
of  York  an  assurance  that  it  is  so. 


1  A 


curiously  false  impression  ;  he  was  sixty  years  of  age. 


n6     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


The  Rev.  W.  H.  Frere  to  T.  A.  L. 

May  n,  1896. 

I  can  only  scribble  a  line  :  I  copied  out  bits  of 
the  Simancas  documents  which  I  hope  are  right, 
but  it  is  hard  to  excerpt  from  things  one  does  not 
know. 

I  looked  for  the  St.  David's  Concessio  on  purpose 
to  compare  it  with  the  Privy  Seal,  but  could  not 
find  it.  Would  such  a  thing  go  under  Letters 
Patent  at  all,  or  merely  under  Privy  Seal  ? 

The  case  goes  well  about  the  re-ordinations.  I 
find  no  later  cases,  though  it  is  fairly  clear  that 
there  were  people  in  Edwardian  Orders  left  in 
possession  of  benefices  who  therefore  ought  at 
least  to  have  been  pressed  to  present  themselves 
if  the  re-ordination  policy  was  a  fixed  one. 

[Enclosure.] 

Extracts   from   the   Calendar  of  Letters  and  State 
Papers  relating  to  English  Affairs,  preserved 
principally    in     the     Archives     of    Simancas. 
Vol.  /,  Elizabeth. 

1561.      22  Jan.     Bishop  Qitadra  to  the  King. 

Since  writing  the  enclosed  letter,  Henry  Sidney, 
who  is  the  brother-in-law  of  Lord  Robert,  came  to 
see  me.  .  .  .  Although  he  is  not  at  all  well  in- 
formed on  religious  questions,  he  did  not  fail  to 
admit  that  the  state  of  the  country  was  very  bad 
and  a  way  must  be  found  to  mend  it.  He  told  me 
a  number  of  things  in  this  respect  which  grieved 
me,  and  endeavoured  to  persuade  me  with  solemn 


LETTERS  117 

oaths  that  the  Queen  and  Lord  Robert  were  deter- 
mined to  restore  religion  by  means  of  a  general 
Concilio.  .  .  . 

23  Feb.     The  same  to  the  same. 

.  .  .  Robert  came  the  next  day.  ...  He  again 
made  me  great  promises  and  assured  me  that 
everything  should  be  placed  in  your  Majesty's 
hands,  and  even  as  regarded  religion,  if  the  sending 
of  a  representative  to  the  Concilio  did  not  suffice, 
he  would  go  himself. 

1 7  Mar.      The  King  to  Bishop  Quadra. 

.  .  .  What  she  might  now  do  is  to  liberate  the 
prelates  and  other  Catholics  she  has  imprisoned, 
agree  to  send  her  Ambassadors  and  Catholic 
bishops  to  the  Concilio  and  submit  herself  un- 
conditionally to  its  decisions.  Besides  this  she 
should,  pending  the  resolutions  of  the  Concilio, 
allow  Catholics  to  live  as  they  please  without 
coercion  or  violence.  .  .  . 

His  Holiness  writes  us  that  he  has  appointed  the 
Abbe  Martinengo  to  carry  the  bull  of  the  Concilio 
to  the  Queen,  and  has  given  him  orders,  when  he 
arrives  in  Flanders,  to  be  governed  by  the  directions 
of  the  Bishop  of  Arras.  .  .  . 

25  Mar.     Bishop  Quadra  to  the  King. 

On  the  23rd  ultimo  I  wrote  to  your  Majesty  that 
the  going  of  the  Earl  of  Bedford  to  France  was 
not  alone  to  condole  for  the  King's  death,  and 
endeavour  to  obtain  a  ratification  of  the  peace,  but 
also  to  try  for  a  close  alliance  between  the  heretics 
there  and  the  Queen.  Since  the  Earl  came  back 


n8     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

I  have  learnt  that  what  has  been  done  is  to  propose 
to  the  Queen-mother  and  the  King's  Council  that, 
as  there  is  a  diversity  of  opinion  on  religion  in 
England,  and  various  counsels  have  been  given  to 
the  Queen,  she  begged  the  French  Queen  to  send 
her  opinion  and  advice  as  to  how  she  should  act. 
They  answered  that  nobody's  opinion  on  so  clear 
a  matter  could  be  very  needful  to  one  so  wise  as  the 
Queen,  who  knew  perfectly  well  how  Christian  and 
Catholic  the  Kingdom  of  England  had  always 
been,  and  how  obedient  to  the  dictates  of  the 
Church.  The  Earl  replied  that  the  Queen's  inten- 
tion was  to  end  these  differences  by  sending  her 
theologians  to  the  general  Concilia,  but  that  she 
thought,  in  order  that  the  Concilio  should  be  held 
with  all-fitting  security  and  freedom,  it  was  neces- 
sary that  it  should  meet  on  this  side  of  the 
mountains,  and  if  the  most  Christian  King  would 
look  to  this  and  endeavour  to  have  some  such 
fitting  place  named,  the  Queen  offered  to  unite  with 
him  and  form  a  firm  alliance  in  order  that  the 
business  might  be  carried  through  with  liberty  and 
security  and  without  coercion  being  resorted 
to.  .  .  . 

Cecil  is  entirely  pledged  to  these  unhappy 
heresies.  ...  He  asked  me  whether  it  would  be 
well  to  have  some  theologians  sent  here  on  the 
Pope's  behalf  to  confer  on  the  Christian  doctrine. 
.  .  .  He  afterwards  asked  me  whether  I  would  con- 
sent to  meet  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  open 
negotiations  for  conciliation.  .  .  .  He  again  asked 
me  recently  what  we  can  do  about  religious  affairs, 
as  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  did  not  care  to, 
come  and  speak  with  me  for  fear  of  being  noted  as 


LETTERS  119 

suspicious  by  the  other  bishops.  .  .  .  He  com- 
plained of  the  style  of  the  bull  of  the  Concilia  and 
the  insulting  words  which  were  constantly  being 
said  and  written  about  them  as  if  they  were  not 
Christians  and  did  not  believe  in  God.  The  end 
of  it  was  to  beg  me  as  a  bishop  and  minister  of  so 
pious  a  Prince  as  your  Majesty  to  endeavour  to 
open  a  way  to  some  fair  understanding.  ...  He 
asked  me  what  were  the  articles  I  wished  to  be 
considered  before  all  others,  and  I  told  him  those 
concerning  ecclesiastical  government  and  policy, 
namely,  the  office  of  Pope  and  Bishops,  the 
authority  of  Concilios  and  the  distinction  between 
spiritual  and  temporal  powers.  We  discussed  this 
at  great  length,  and  at  last  he  said  the  following 
three  things  to  me,  I  know  not  in  what  spirit. 
First,  that  the  Queen  would  be  willing  to  send  her 
Ambassadors  and  theologians  to  the  Concilia,  even 
though  it  were  convoked  by  the  Pope,  on  condition 
that  the  meeting  was  at  a  place  satisfactory  to  the 
other  Princes,  namely,  your  Majesty,  the  Emperor, 
and  the  King  of  France.  He  then  said  that  she 
would  be  willing  that  the  Pope  or  his  legates 
should  preside  in  the  Concilio  in  such  a  way  as  did 
not  infer  that  he  was  a  ruler  over  it,  but  only  as 
head  or  president  of  it.  The  third  was  that  they 
would  be  in  favour  of  judging  questions  of  faith  as 
well  as  others,  according  to  the  precepts  of  holy 
scripture,  consensus  of  divines,  and  the  declarations 
of  ancient  Concilios.  He  was  very  emphatic  about 
these  ancient  Concilios,  saying  that  he  would  only 
admit  the  first  four.  He  then  said  that  what  I 
demanded  was  evidently  to  have  a  judge  for 
matters  of  faith  and  to  declare  the  separation  of  the 


120     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

temporal  and  spiritual  powers,  and  he  went  on  to 
say  that  as  the  English  bishops  are  canonically 
ordained  they  must  have  seats  in  the  Concilia 
amongst  the  others.  I  told  him  that  in  regard  to 
that  the  justice  of  his  claim  could  afterwards  be 
considered,  and  then  asked  him  whether  in  case  the 
Concilia  fell  through,  which  it  well  might  if  the 
German  Protestants  were  obstinate  in  their  claims, 
he  thought  this  reconciliation  between  this  kingdom 
and  the  Catholics  could  be  effected  by  means  of 
a  national  Concilia  with  the  same  intervention  and 
presidency  of  the  Pope's  legates.  ...  I  hear  he  is 
going  about  publicly  saying  that  the  Queen  wishes 
to  send  representatives  to  the  Concilia,  and  that 
the  Concilia  cannot  properly  be  judge  of  questions 
of  faith,  nor  is  the  Pope  able  to  preside  over 
it  by  right,  which  was  the  subject  of  our  dis- 
cussion. 

I  also  know  that  he  is  treating  these  bishops 
harshly,  and  that  he  used  insulting  words  to  the 
bishop  of  Winchester  the  other  day  because  he 
preached  against  the  authority  of  the  Concilios.  I 
hear  that  the  bishops  frequently  meet  in  the  arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury's  house  and  are  drawing  up  a 
profession  of  their  faith  to  send  to  the  Concilia. 

1 2  April.      The  same  to  the  same. 

...  I  think  that  the  Abbe  Martinengo's  visit 
will  enable  us  to  settle  the  business  very  com- 
fortably. .  .  . 

I  therefore  think  that  the  coming  of  the  Nuncio 
should  be  accelerated  so  that  we  may  see  the  answers 
they  give  him  before  the  Queen  settles  her  own 
affair,  which  she  could  now  do,  having  time,  and 


LETTERS  121 

being  popular  in  consequence  of  the  news  that  she 
is  to  be  represented  in  the  Concilio.  .  .  . 

Robert  tells  me  that  Cecil  will  be  firm  about 
sending  representatives  to  the  Concilio,  and  there 
are  some  amongst  the  bishops  who  are  already 
beginning  to  soften  and  bend  to  what  the  Queen 
desires,  although  others  are  very  stubborn.  .  .  . 

27  April.    Bishop  Quadra  to  Lord  Robert  Dudley. 

.  .  .  On  the  22nd  of  January  I  received  a  visit 
from  Sir  Henry  Sidney,  your  brother-in-law.  .  .  . 
[He]  assured  me  that  the  intention  of  the  Queen 
and  opinion  of  your  Lordship  and  all  prudent  men 
was  that  she  should  be  represented  in  the  Concilio. 
I  had  no  difficulty  in  believing  this,  as  it  seemed  just 
and  probable  ;  and  I  was  confirmed  in  my  belief 
shortly  afterwards  by  the  Queen  personally,  who 
told  me  with  her  own  lips  several  times  that  she 
wished  to  send  representatives  to  the  Concilio.  .  .  . 

May  5.     Bishop  Quadra  to  the  King. 


The  paper  contained  two  principal  points,  namely, 
that  the  Queen  did  not  consider  it  well  to  admit 
the  Nuncio,  inasmuch  as  it  was  against  the  law 
and  good  policy  of  the  country,  and  that  in  this 
step  she  followed  the  precedent  of  Queen  Mary, 
who  had  prohibited  the  entrance  of  the  Nuncio 
who  brought  the  Cardinal's  hat  to  Peto  from  Pope 
Paul  IV. 

The  second  point  was  that  as  the  Queen  under- 
stood the  object  of  the  Nuncio's  coming  was  to 
intimate  to  her  the  holding  of  the  Concilio,  she 
informed  me  that  she  had  decided  not  to  give  her 


122     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER   DOCUMENTS 

acquiescence  to  such  Concilia,  nor  to  consent  to  the 
continuance  of  that  which  had  commenced  at  Trent, 
both  on  account  of  the  lack  of  freedom  which 
apparently  would  exist,  and  because  she  had  not 
been  consulted,  as  she  ought  to  have  been,  as  to 
the  place  of  meeting  and  other  circumstances  in 

1  O 

the  same  way  that  other  princes  had  been  con- 
sulted. 

She  did  not  say,  nevertheless,  that  she  would  not 
assist  when  a  free  and  pious  Concilio  was  held,  by 
sending  her  ambassadors  and  learned  persons  of 
the  Anglican  Church  to  endeavour  to  agree  to  a 
consensus  of  doctrines  in  the  Universal  Church,  as 
all  princes  should  do.  .  .  . 

I  am  quite  sure  that  these  people,  bad  as  they  are, 
were  not  of  the  same  opinion  in  the  matter  three 
months  ago  as  they  are  now.  .  .  . 

May  6.  Bishop  Quadra  to  the  Duchess  of  Parma 
and  the  Cardinal  Bishop  of  Arras  (De  Granvelle]. 

These  people,  however,  are  so  satisfied  with  them- 
selves that  it  is  useless  to  point  out  their  errors. 
As  regards  their  willingness  to  join  in  a  Concilio  if 
it  is  what  they  call  free,  Christian,  and  pious,  and  is 
arranged  by  the  other  great  powers  in  union  with 
England  and  in  consultation  with  his  Holiness,  your 
Highness  will  bear  this  in  mind  so  that,  if  there  be 
any  occasion  to  proceed  with  these  negotiations,  it 
must  be  understoood  that  the  Queen  claims  to  be 
treated  like  the  rest,  and  to  attend  on  the  same 
footing  as  the  others.  Although  the  liberty  and 
piety  which  they  demand  in  the  Concilio  may  be 
nothing  more  than  dislike  to  any  Concilio  at  all,  as 


LETTERS  123 

they  none  of  them  want  it,  yet,  if  the  other  sovereigns 
agree,  these  people  will  be  bound  to  attend  by  the 
answer  they  have  given. 

NOTE  ON  THE  ABOVE. 

The  above  excerpts  from  the  Simancas  correspondence 
were  sent  in  answer  to  a  request  contained  in  a  letter  from 
Father  Puller,  dated  May  7th.  The  Bishop  of  Peter- 
borough had  recently  referred  to  the  subject  in  a  lecture 
on  Queen  Elizabeth.  The  use  we  made  of  them,  profiting 
by  a  hint  from  Duchesne  (Diary,  May  6th),  may  be  seen 
in  the  following  passage  taken  from  the  Supplementum, 

PP-  33-5  :— 

Restat  quaestio  de  animo  imponentis;  Utrum  intentione 
perversa  ad  verum  ecclesiae  ministerium  obruendum  ritus 
in  usum  reductus  fuerit.  Qui  autem  ritum  imposuerunt  ? 
Anne  auctores  ?  Sed  quinam  illi  ?  Paene  ignoti  sunt. 
Cranmer  ex  illis  procul  dubio  erat.  Ex  aliis  vix  unus 
dignoscitur.  R.  P.  Sydney  Smith  voluit  ostendere  Mar- 
tinum  Bucerum  magnam  in  componendis  ordinationibus 
partem  habuisse.1  Id  autem  ratione  temporum  facile 
refutatur.  Nam  Bucer  in  Angliam  venit  mense  lunio, 
1549;  et  proximo  mense  lanuario  scripsit  ad  amicum  : 
"  Quod  me  mones  de  puritate  rituum,  scito  hie  neminem 
extraneum  de  his  rebus  rogari."2  At  novus  ritus  iam 
mense  Octobri  1549  paratus  est.  Certe  Bucer  voluit  ritum 
iam  efformatum  ex  sententia  sua  reformare,  distinctionem 
ordinum  evertere,  formam  quae  tune  essentialis  putabatur 
eiicere;  in  eumque  finem  ritunculum  inter  scripta  sua  adhuc 
asservatum  conscripsisse  videtur  ;  sed  frustra  laborabat.3 

Nee  vero  ab  auctoribus  ritum  accepimus.  Episcopi 
primo,  potestati  civili  fortasse  morem  gerentes,  sed  tamen 
officio  pastorali  utentes,  eum  in  usum  receperunt,  quorum 

1  Vide  The  Tablet,  Jan.  18,  25  ;  Feb.  8  ;  1896. 

2  Cit.  apud  Lawrence,  Bampton  Lectures,  p.  245.     R.  P.  Sydney  Smith 
hanc  epistolam  anno  1551  scriptam  esse  ratione  tenuissima  affirmare  voluit. 

3  Cum  de  hac  re  in  dissertatione  De  Hier.  Angl.   n.   206  disseruimus, 
Bucerum  istam  ritus  adumbrationem  antequam  ritus  Eduardini  parati  essent 
scripsisse  putabamus  ;  id  quod  vix  possibile  nunc  videtur. 


i24     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

non  paucos  nulla  haereseos  simulatione  suspectos  Car- 
dinalis  Legatus  postea  agnovit  et  cum  Ecclesia  Romana 
reconciliavit.  Sed  neque  ab  illis  nos  ritum  accepimus. 
Namque  ritus,  tempore  Mariae  reiectus,  anno  demum  1559 
in  usum  reductus  est.  Si  igitur  de  animo  imponentis 
quaeratur,  rogari  debet  quo  sensu  quave  intentione  id 
factum  sit.  Qui  autem  id  fecerunt?  Non  exules  qui 
postmodum  ex  conventibus  Calvinistarum  Helveticis  et 
Germanicis  reversi  tantam  rerum  ecclesiasticarum  in 
Anglia  confusionem  moliebantur.  Isti  enim  adhuc  aut 
non  redierant,  aut  certe  potestate  non  erant  adepti.  Qui 
igitur  ?  Elizabetha,  eiusque  consiliarii ;  Cecil,  Parker, 
eorumque  similes,  qui  domi,  usque  dum  Maria  regnabat, 
morati  aut  eis  quae  tune  fiebant  tacite  assenserant,  aut 
saltern  privati  vitam  tranquillam  sine  haeretico  tumultu 
degerant.  Ab  his,  cum  plurium  consensu,  ritus  Eduardinus 
in  usum  reductus  est.  Qua  tandem  intentione?  Anne  ut 
ministerium  Ecclesiae  everteretur ;  ut  novum  aliquod  ad 
mentem  haereticorum  conderetur? 

Testentur  ea  quae  deinde  sequebantur.  Testetur  Calvi- 
nistarum reiectio,  imo,  si  volueris,  persecutio.  Multum  fuit 
illis  cum  nostris  religionis  commercium.  Fateor :  sed  eo 
magis  illustratur  ex  parte  nostra  Calviniani  ministerii  ac 
regiminis  obstinata  reiectio.  Ac  si  in  ea  parte  praxis  et 
doctrina  nostratum  arctissime  definiatur,  non  minus  in- 
notuit  eorundem  firmissima  voluntas  sese  cum  ceteris 
Catholicis  coniungendi.  Anno  1561  Pius  IV  consilium 
inibat  de  Synodo  Tridentina  instauranda.  Litteras  de  ea 
re  ad  Elizabethan!  scripsit,  urgitque  ut  oratores  mitteret. 
Haec  in  dissertatione  notavimus,  sed  deerat  nobis  certa  de 
reginae  Anglorumque  voluntate  notitia.  Ea  nunc  sup- 
peditat.  In  litteris  oratoris  Hispani  ad  curiam  Anglicam 
invenitur.  De  Quadra  ad  regem  Philippum  indesinenter 
scribebat  de  Anglorum  in  future  Concilio  participatione. 
Die  25°  Martii  1561  narrat  se  cum  Cecilio  collocutum  esse, 
qui  ex  parte  reginae  dixisset  Anglos  Concilio  hisce  con- 
ditionibus  libenter  interfuturos  esse :  si  locus  ex  sententia 
principum  Christianorum  designatus  foret ;  si  Papa,  aut 
ipse  aut  per  Legates,  ea  lege  praesideret  ut  non  superior, 


LETTERS  125 

sed  caput  tantum  Concilii  et  praeses  videretur ;  si  defini- 
tiones  de  fide  expraeceptis  S.  Scripturae,  consensu  doctor- 
urn,  et  regulis  antiquorum  Conciliorum  fierent ;  si  episcopi 
Anglicani,  cum  canonice  ordinati  essent,  aequo  iure  cum 
aliis  episcopis  in  Concilio  sederent1 

Quorsum  haec?  Utrum  sincere  dicta  sint  nescio.  Utrum 
regina  consiliariique  sui  Concilio  interesse  revera  voluerint, 
dubium  est.  Attamen  haec  certe  non  verba  sunt  hominis 
qui  novam  Ecclesiam  condere,  novum  ministerium  con- 
stituere  voluerit.  Quod  autem  Cecil  dixit,  idem  omnes 
fere  Anglicani  senserunt.  Ecclesiam  Anglicanam,  quae 
inde  a  populi  incunabulis  originem  habuit,  quae  tot 
sanctorum  meritis  ornata  per  decem  fere  saecula  una  cum 
gente  increverat,  eisdem  legibus,  eadem  fide,  eisdem  Sacra- 
mentis,  nova  libertate  praeditam,  in  multos  annos  con- 
tinuare  voluerunt  Audax  erat  conatus,  tempora  periculosa ; 
ab  illo  unitatis  centro  unde  tot  sublevamina,  tot  iniurias 
acceperant,  discedentes,  ab  ipsa  tamen  unitate,  ut  sibi 
suadebant,  non  discessuri,  propriis  viribus  cum  divina  gratia 
religionem  ac  veritatem  sustentare  statuerunt.  Antiqua 
retinere,  non  nova  condere  moliebantur.  Dicere  licet  id 
temere  inceptum :  sed  eos  nihil  aliud  voluisse  res  ipsae 
testantur. 

The  Rev.  Canon  Ross-Lewin  to  T.  A.  L. 

15  May,  1896. 

The  recent  letter  of  the  Bishop  of  Stepney  may 
lead  some  to  suppose  that  re-ordination  took  place 
during  Mary's  reign,  at  any  rate  in  the  diocese  of 
London.  I  think,  however,  the  following  passage 
(quoted  on  a  fly-leaf  of  this  letter)  will  show  that 
some  supposed  deficiency,  e.g.  oil,  was  alone 
supplied,  and  that,  I  imagine,  only  in  some  dioceses. 
***** 

I  have  sent  the  passage  from  Pilkington  to  the 
Bishop  of  Stepney,  and  he  admits  its  force.     The 

1  Ex  Archiv.  Simancas  State  Papers,  Elizabeth;  1561  ;  p.  189. 


126     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Bishops  who  supplied  the  lack  of  oil  merely  obeyed 
the  injunction  given  to  them. 

#  #  #  *  # 

"  They  would  make  men  believe  that  the  oil  hath  such 
holiness  in  it,  that  whosoever  wanteth  it  is  no  priest  nor 
minister.  Therefore  in  the  late  days  of  popery  our  holy 
bishops  called  before  them  all  such  as  were  made  ministers 
without  such  greasing,  and  blessed  them  with  the  popes 
blessing,  anointed  them,  and  then  all  was  perfect ;  they 
might  sacrifice  for  quick  and  dead."  (Pilkington,  Exposi- 
tion upon  the  Prophet  Aggeus,  A.D.  1562.  Reprinted  in 
Pilkington' s  Works,  Parker  Society  Ed.,  p.  163.) 


The  Rev.  Edward  Denny  to  T.  A.  L. 

1 6  May,  1896. 

I  examined  last  Friday  the  original  at  the  Record 
Office  of  the  Royal  Assent  to  Barlow's  election  to 
St.  David's,  signed  by  the  King,  and  compared  it 
with  (i)  the  like  Assent  to  Sampson's  election  to 
Chichester  on  the  Patent  Rolls,  and  (2)  the  original 
Assent  signed  like  the  Barlow  document  by  the 
King,  to  Repps'  election  to  Norwich,  and  found 
the  clause,  "ut  quod  vestrum  est  in  hac  parte 
exequamini,"  in  all  three.  So  far  as  I  understand 
the  matter,  the  Royal  Assent  signed  by  the  King 
is  the  sole  document  which  emanated  from  the  King 
himself  in  such  a  case  ;  and  this  formed  the  founda- 
tion of  the  Letters  Patent  required  by  25  Henry  viii. 
c.  20,  which  could  not  without  it  be  passed  under 
the  Great  Seal.  It  seems  to  me  a  very  important 
document,  the  weight  of  which  cannot  be  destroyed 
by  the  non-discovery  of  the  Letters  Patent. 


LETTERS  127 

The  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood  to  T.  A.  L. 

May  1 8,  1896. 

I  augur  well  from  the  reference  to  a  Commission 
of  Cardinals  instead  of  the  cause  going  in  the  usual 
course  to  the  S.C.  of  the  Holy  Office  itself  for 
decree.  I  congratulate  you  both  on  your  invitation 
from  the  Cardinal  Secretary  to  remain  in  Rome. 
I  wish  that  a  Commission  could  be  got  to  search  for 
and  Calendar  all  papers  at  the  Vatican  relating  to 
English  affairs  from  the  time  of  the  divorce  down  to 
the  3rd  or  4th  of  Elizabeth.  There  must  be  papers 
there  of  importance,  and  perhaps  some  unexpected 
ones.  The  mere  fact  of  that  letter  of  Cromwell  to 
Tuke  (June  12,  1536)  seems  to  me  to  indicate  such 
a  possibility.  By  the  way,  has  Puller  investigated 
that  again  ?  Would  it  be  possible  to  get  it  photo- 
graphed ?  I  want  to  discover  whether  it  is  an 
original.  If  one  could  have  a  photograph,  I  could 
get  an  opinion  as  to  the  date  of  handwriting.  If 
you  cannot,  then  please  see  (i)  whether  it  is  on  a 
separate  sheet  by  itself,  (2)  whether  there  is  any 
other  writing  on  the  sheet  or  any  endorsement  or 
address.  Cut  a  piece  of  paper  the  exact  size  and 
shape.  If  possible,  facsimile  by  tracing,  if  it  would 
be  allowed,  Cromwell's  signature. 

I  am  also  anxious  that  you  should  get  a  sight  of 
the  Abyssinian  decrees. 

(i)  The  document  of  April  9,  1704,  given  by 
Estcourt.  He  of  course  only  actually  reproduces 
the  response  of  the  Holy  Office,  May  1860,  which 
quotes  the  "  Risoluzione  "  of  the  S.C.  S.O.  of  April 
9,  1704.  It  will  be  desirable  to  inspect,  if  it  could 
be  managed  (and  I  suppose  Cardinal  Rampolla 


128     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

could  manage  anything  he  chose  in  this  way),  the 
actual  record,  and  ascertain  whether  it  was  the 
report  of  consultors  or  an  actual  decree.  If  not  the 
latter,  then  whether  there  was  a  decree,  probably 
a  few  days  later.  It  seems  so  impossible  to  reconcile 
Cardinal  Patrizzi's  statement  with  the  plain  words 
of  the  Risoluzione. 

(2)  The  decree  of  1860. 

(3)  The    Gordon    Case.      I    cannot   understand 
Duchesne's  statement.     The  decree  (April  17,  1704) 
says  nothing  about  "  Accipe,  etc."     Does  he  refer  to 
any  record  of  votes  of  Consultors?     If  so,   when 
were  such  votes,  or  report  founded  thereon,  presented 
to  the  Holy  Office  ? 

You  observe  the  dates  April  9  and  April  1 7  in  the 
same  year.  It  seems  to  me  absolutely  impossible  to 
suppose  that  in  the  space  of  a  week  the  Holy  Office 
could  give  two  diametrically  opposite  determinations. 

As  regards  "  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum  "  being  a 
valid  form  for  the  Priesthood,  what  can  be  said  to 
the  following  ? 

The  Episcopate  is  the  plenitude  of  the  Priesthood. 
The  Priesthood  is  included  in  the  Episcopate.  The 
Episcopate  can  be  validly  conferred  per  saltum. 
But  "  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum  "  alone  is,  according 
to  the  Sententia  Communis,  a  sufficient  and  valid  form 
by  itself  for  conferring  the  Episcopate.  Therefore 
if  a  layman  is  consecrated  by  imposition  of  hands 
and  the  words  "  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,"  only, 
with  the  intention  to  make  him  a  Bishop,  he  is 
validly  consecrated  and  becomes  Bishop  and  Priest. 
Therefore  the  Priesthood  was  conferred  by  the  form 
"Accipe,  etc."  Therefore  "Accipe,  etc."  is  a  valid 
form  for  Priesthood. 


LETTERS  129 


T.  A.  L.  to  the  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood. 

24  May,  1896. 

Duchesne  has  a  letter  from  the  Vice-Chancellor 
of  Cambridge  asking  him  to  come  and  receive 
an  honorary  degree  (D.  Litt.)  on  June  18.  Great 
excitement  thereanent  among  all  our  friends.  He 
would  like  full  information. 

*  #  *  *  # 

The  letter  on  the  back  of  which  I  am  writing  was 
sent  to  Cardinal  Mazzella  with  your  copy  of  the 
Mandate,  which  is  now  probably  reposing  perma- 
nently in  the  archives  of  the  Holy  Office,  since 
everything  has  been  prepared  there  ;  but  the  question 
is  not  in  the  Holy  Office.  You  may  count  on  that, 
whatever  the  Tablet  says.  We  know  it  because 
the  two  Vannutelli  have  told  us  that  they  are  seised 
of  it,  and  they  are  not  in  the  Holy  Office.  So  much 
the  better. * 

It  is  quite  impossible  to  get  at  the  archives  of 
the  Holy  Office.  One  might  as  well  ask  to  see 
Rothschild's  books.  Nor  should  we  gain  anything 
if  we  did.  We  know  what  the  result  in  Gordon's 
case  was,  and  the  archives  could  reveal  nothing 
more,  for  the  decrees  are  never  motives.  Mazzella 
explained  the  process  to  Portal.  The  vota  of  Con- 
suitors  are  read.  The  Prefect  asks  each  Cardinal 
his  decision — affirmative,  negative,  dilatanda,  or  what 
not, — no  reasons  being  assigned.  Then  either  a 
decision  is  given  by  the  majority,  or  the  question  is 
marked  dilata.  In  the  former  case  it  may  or  not  be 

1  This  may  serve  to  show  how  extremely  imperfect  our  information 
was. 


130     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

submitted  to  the  Pope  for  confirmation.  In  the 
Abyssinian  case  in  1704  no  decision  was  given,  so 
presumably  the  question  was  marked  dilata.  What 
the  Holy  Office  supplied  to  the  Propaganda  in  1860 
was  an  unanimous  votum  of  the  Consultors,  and  the 
proceeding  is  regarded  as  a  highly  irregular  and 
improper  one.  In  Gordon's  case  the  dossier  is 
complete.  Duchesne  gave  us  a  general  idea  of  its 
contents. 

I  am  ashamed  of  having  left  you  in  the  dark  so 
long  on  one  point.  I  seem  to  have  conveyed  to 
you  somehow  the  idea  that  Puller  had  found  in  the 
Archives  a  copy  of  the  Tuke  letter.  It  was  merely 
Gairdner  that  he  consulted  in  the  library :  when 
you  first  wrote  about  it  I  was  utterly  mystified. 

My  Supplementum  will  be  out  to-morrow  or 
Tuesday.  Our  next  business  is  to  place  a  memo- 
randum by  Mr.  Gladstone  in  the  hands  of  Cardinal 
Rampolla.  This  will  delay  us  here  a  little  longer 
yet. 

The  Rev.  E.  G.  Wood  to  T.  A.  L. 

May  27,  1896. 

I  cannot  say  I  am  yet  satisfied  about  the 
Abyssinian  case.  Cardinal  Patrizzi  at  any  rate 
called  the  pronouncement  a  "decree."  Referring 
to  what  Bouix  ( Tractatus  de  Curia  Romana,  p.  1 54), 
says  as  to  the  procedure  of  the  H.O.,  I  cannot 
think  that  the  Resolution  was  a  document  drawn 
up  by  the  Consultors. 

There  are  three  kinds  of  meeting  :  ( i )  Consultors 
without  Cardinals  but  with  the  Assessor ;  (2)  the 
Cardinals  without  the  Pope ;  (3)  the  Cardinals  with 


LETTERS  131 

the  Pope.  These  are  respectively  termed  Con- 
gressus  Feriae  II,  Feriae  IV,  and  Feriae  V.  In  the 
second  the  Consultors  are  called  in  and  "eorum 
sententia  expetetur."  Then  the  Cardinals  "defini- 
tive pronuntiant  ac  decernunt,"  unless  they  con- 
sider the  matter  very  grave,  and  so  remit  it  ad 
Congressum  Feriae  V,  in  which  the  Pope  (who,  and 
none  other,  is  himself  Prefect  of  the  S.C.S.O.) 
presides  ;  otherwise  they  decide  without  the  Pope. 
I  cannot  but  think  that  the  resolution  was  not  a 
votum  of  the  Consultors.  Moreover,  I  cannot  help 
thinking  that  the  procedure  you  describe  is  that  of 
the  S.  C.  Concilii,  especially  as  regards  the  causes 
''In  Folio  "  and  not  that  of  the  Holy  Office. 

But  any  way,  it  seems  quite  clear  that  in  1860  the 
Holy  Office  adopted  as  its  own  the  resoluzione  of 
1704.  Whatever  its  value  in  1704,  surely  the 
H.O.  validated  it  and  used  it  as  the  expression 
of  its  answer  to  the  question  laid  before  it  in  1860. 
I  cannot  see  that  all  that  has  been  said  touches 
that. 

*  *  *  TV  *?(• 

I  do  hope  the  Special  Commission  will  not  be  in 
a  hurry,  but  adjourn  for  some  months.  To  judge 
by  the  tone  of  the  Revue,  I  cannot  say  I  think  our 
friends  even  yet  appreciate  our  position  ;  and,  if  so, 
how  much  less  our  adversaries.  The  note  on  p.  367 
to  the  Abbe*  Klein's  paper  is  not  satisfactory. 
Conditional  reordination,  they  must  understand,  is 
a  thing  we  cannot  even  consent  to  discuss.  Some 
paper  in  reply  to  Klein's  would  seem  to  me  advis- 
able. We  shall  gain  nothing  by  being  too  "mealy 
mouthed." 


1 32     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

The  Prior  of  Monte  Cassino  to  T.  A.  L. 

i  June ,  1 896. 

Grates  tibi  refero  ex  toto  cordis  affectu  pro  libris 
quos  dono  misisti  huic  nostrae  egerrimae  biblio- 
thecae,  una  cum  epistola  mihi  gratissima. 

Faxit  Deus  ut  plures  nostrae  bibliothecae  sint 
memores,  tuumque  bonum  sequantur  exemplum. 
Ipse  vero  centuplum  tibi  rependat,  teque  in  multi- 
tudine  pacis  inhabitare  faciat. 

The  Bishop  of  Ely  to  T.  A.  L. 

June  26,  1896. 

I  met  Duchesne  at  Lord  Halifax's  on  Tuesday, 
and  had  some  interesting  talk,  but  nothing  more 
about  the  Commission  than  you  know  already.  I 
shall  be  glad  if  the  result  tends  or  helps  toward  the 
reunion  of  Christendom,  though  I  cannot  agree 
with  Lord  Halifax  that  one  "  fragment  of  the 
episcopate "  should  accept  the  judgment  of  the 
rest.  Minorities  are  often  in  the  right,  as  the  old 
"Athanasius  contra  mundum "  shows.  And  what 
we  heard  from  Duchesne,  which  you  also  mention, 
of  the  position  of  Uniats — as  you  wisely  call  it,  the 
present  policy  of  Rome — does  not  incline  one  to  that 
solution. 

T.  A.  L.  to  Mr.  Gladstone. 

June  30,  1896. 

I  am  taking  the  liberty  of  sending  you  copies  of 
two  pamphlets,  which  I  had  printed  while  in  Rome. 
I  intended  to  ask  Father  Puller  to  present  them 
to  you,  but  I  had  not  copies  ready  to  my  hand 


LETTERS  133 

in  time.  The  de  Re  Anglicana  was  not  written 
for  publication,  but  I  think  you  may  be  interested 
in  seeing  it. 

I  have  just  seen  the  abstract  of  the  new  Encyclical 
in  the  Times,  furnished,  I  suppose,  by  Cardinal 
Vaughan.  An  idea  of  what  it  would  contain  was 
given  me  some  weeks  ago  by  Mgr.  Gasparri,  whom 
the  Pope  consulted  about  it.  He  thought  it  would 
prove  a  turning  point  in  the  theology  of  the  Church, 
and  I  think  he  was  hardly  exaggerating  its  import- 
ance. The  main  point  which  he  led  me  to  expect 
was  the  distinction  drawn  between  the  unicitas  and 
the  unitas  of  the  Church.  These  phrases  have  been 
used  for  some  time  in  the  Roman  schools,  but  the 
Pope  gives  them  a  new  interest  by  showing  that  the 
Church  which  is  unita  is  not  necessarily  identical 
in  extent  with  the  Ecclesia  unica.  It  is  no  small 
gain  to  have  a  definition  from  Rome  that  the 
separated  communions  are  really  parts  of  the  Ecclesia 
unica.  It  follows  that  the  unitas  which  according 
to  the  Pope  is  to  be  found  only  in  communion  with 
the  Holy  See  is  necessary,  to  employ  the  familiar 
distinction,  rather  for  the  bene  esse  than  for  the 
esse  of  the  Church.  Separation  will  affect,  not  the 
efficacy,  but  only  the  legitimacy  of  the  operations 
of  the  episcopate.  Add  to  this  the  important  defini- 
tion of  the  magisterium  as  residing  not  in  the 
papacy  but  in  the  episcopate,  and  the  final  assertion 
that  bishops  are  in  no  sense  mere  vicars  of  the  Pope, 
and  it  seems  to  me  that  the  relations  between  the 
Churches  are  once  more  brought  within  the  sphere 
of  more  or  less  friendly  argument. 

The  daily  papers — as  one  might  expect — are 
widely  astray  as  to  the  bearing  of  the  Encyclical. 


134     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

I  hope  that  a  few  days'  consideration  will  enable 
Englishmen  to  take  a  juster  view  of  its  importance 
and  interest  to  themselves. 


Mr.  Gladstone  to  T.  A.  L. 

July  3,   1896. 

I  thank  you  for  your  tracts,  and  I  think  we  are 
all  indebted  to  you  and  Father  Puller  for  under- 
taking so  bravely  an  arduous  work,  which  I  do  not 
suppose  could  have  been  better  performed. 

I  have  read  the  Encyclical,  and  have  not  enough 
knowledge  to  see  in  it  all  that  Mgr.  Gasparri 
describes  :  but  I  see  nothing  at  variance  with  his 
view,  nor  anything  which  ought  to  inspire  dark 
anticipations  as  to  the  Pope's  eventual  utterance  on 
the  subject  of  Anglican  Orders.  I  do  not  allow 
myself  to  be  very  sanguine  about  that  utterance  : 
but  I  read  the  Encyclical,  with  its  strong  self- 
assertion  of  the  Papacy,  as  intended  to  clear  the 
ground  for  whatever  he  may  have  to  say,  and  to  let 
his  flock  know  that,  whatever  it  may  be,  they  have 
nothing  to  do  but  obey  it. 

The  Pope  has  sent  through  Cardinal  Rampolla 
to  the  Abate  Tosti  for  transmission  to  me  a  very 
kind  and  gracious  message. 

We  were  much  pleased  with  the  Abbe  Duchesne, 
whom  Lord  Acton  conceives  to  be  the  most  learned 
man  in  France. 

The  "  Life  of  Manning "  and  the  Duchesne 
movement  are  enough  to  make  this  a  considerable 
year  in  the  history  of  the  Church. * 

1  Reproduced  by  permission  from  Correspondence  on  Church  and 
Religion  of  William  Ewart  Gladstone,  by  D.  C.  Lathbury.     Vol.  II 
P-73- 


LETTERS  135 


T.  A.  L.  to  the  Rev.  W.  H.  Frere. 

Sept.  26,  1896. 

T?  ^r?  TV  *Jv~  TV 

The  document  published  by  Le  Quien  is  worthless. 
The  Archives  of  the  Holy  Office  are  inaccessible. 
I  was  told  that  not  even  the  Pope  himself  can  give 
permission  for  any  one  to  see  them  except  a  Con- 
suitor.  But  we  did  see  at  Rome  what  Moyes  had 
extracted  from  them  relative  to  the  Gordon  case, 
and  Scannell — who  was  really  friendly,  though  not 
at  all  in  favour  of  the  validity,  unless  indeed  he  was 
convinced  by  the  course  of  the  investigation — told 
me  that  they  had  before  them  the  whole  dossier  of 
the  case,  and  that  there  was'  unquestionably  a 
thorough  examination  of  the  rite  and  all  its  history 
and  its  circumstances.  A  Consultor  was  sent  to 
England  expressly  to  examine  things  closely,  and 
his  report  was  most  candid.  Thus  Scannell.  On 
these  inquiries,  and  not  at  all  on  Gordon's  Supplica, 
the  decision  was  based. 

In  the  Commission,  Cardinal  Mazzella  refused 
to  let  the  consultors  go  behind  the  Gordon  decision  : 
they  were  consultors  of  the  Holy  Office  and  were 
bound  by  all  its  decisions.  This  Duchesne  told  us. 
It  was  almost  certain  that  if  the  Pope  sent  the  matter 
to  the  Holy  Office  they  would  practically  refuse  to 
re-open  the  points  decided  in  the  Gordon  case. 
Only  if  it  was  sent  to  a  special  Commission  of 
Cardinals  was  there  any  hope  of  this.  It  was  sent 
to  the  Holy  Office — and  behold  the  result ! l  As 
Portal  says,  the  only  question  for  them  was,  whether 

1  Written  after  the  publication  of  the  Bull  Apostolicae  Curae. 


136     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

there  were  grounds  for  revising  the  decision,  and 
their  answer  was  negative.  I  believe  the  only  fresh 
investigation  has  been  of  the  historical  facts  :  about 
them  the  Bull  observes  a  significant  silence  for  the 
most  part. 


MR.  GLADSTONE'S   MEMORANDUM 


IV 

MR.    GLADSTONE'S 
MEMORANDUM 

Addressed  to  the  Archbishop  of  York1 

THE  question  of  the  validity  of  Anglican  orders 
plight  seem  to  be  of  limited  interest  if  it  were 
only  to  be  treated  by  the  amount  of  any  immediate, 
practical,  and  external  consequences,  likely  to  follow 
upon  any  discussion  or  decision  that  might  now  be 
taken  in  respect  to  it.  For  the  clergy  of  the  Anglican 
communion,  numbering  between  30,000  and  40,000, 
and  for  their  flocks,  the  whole  subject  is  one  of 
settled  solidity.  In  the  Oriental  Churches  there 
prevails  a  sentiment  of  increased  and  increasing 
friendliness  towards  the  Anglican  Church,  but  no 
question  of  actual  intercommunion  is  likely  at  present 
to  arise,  while  happily  no  system  of  proselytism 
exists  to  set  a  blister  on  our  mutual  relations.  In 
the  Latin  Church,  which  from  its  magnitude  and  the 
close  tissue  of  its  organizations  overshadows  all 
Western  Christendom,  these  Orders,  so  far  as  they 
have  been  noticed,  have  been  commonly  disputed, 
or  denied,  or  treated  as  if  they  were  null.  A  positive 
condemnation  of  them,  if  viewed  dryly  in  its  letter, 
would  do  no  more  than  harden  the  existing  usage 
of  reordination  in  the  case,  which  at  most  periods 

-1  See  Diary,  May  24th. 
139 


i4o     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

has  been  a  rare  one,  of  Anglican  clergy  who  might 
seek  admission  to  the  clerical  order  in  the  Roman 
Church. 

But  very  different  indeed  would  be  the  moral 
aspect  and  effect  of  a  formal,  authorized  investiga- 
tion of  the  question  at  Rome,  to  whichever  side  the 
result  might  incline.  It  is  to  the  last  degree  im- 
probable that  a  ruler  of  known  wisdom  would  at  this 
time  put  in  motion  the  machinery  of  the  Curia  for 
the  purpose  of  widening  the  breach  which  severs 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  from  a  communion 
which,  though  small  in  comparison,  yet  is  extended 
through  the  large  and  fast-increasing  range  of  the 
English-speaking  races,  and  which  represents,  in  the 
religious  sphere,  one  of  the  most  powerful  nations  of 
European  Christendom.  According  to  my  reading 
of  history,  that  breach  is,  indeed,  already  a  wide  one  ; 
but  the  existing  schism  has  not  been  put  into  stereo- 
type by  any  anathema,  or  any  express  renunciation 
of  communion,  on  either  side.  As  an  acknowledg- 
ment of  Anglican  Orders  would  not  create  inter- 
communion, so  a  condemnation  of  them  would  not 
absolutely  excommunicate  ;  but  it  would  be  a  step, 
and  even  morally  a  stride,  towards  excommunication, 
and  it  would  stand  as  a  practical  affirmation  of  the 
principle  that  it  is  wise  to  make  the  religious  differ- 
ences between  the  Churches  of  Christendom  more 
conspicuous  to  the  world,  and  also  to  bring  them 
into  a  state  of  the  highest  fixity,  so  as  to  enhance 
the  difficulty  of  approaching  them  at  any  future  time 
in  the  spirit  of  reconciliation.  From  such  a  point 
of  view,  an  inquiry  resulting  in  a  proscription  of 
Anglican  orders  would  be  no  less  important  than 
deplorable. 


MR.  GLADSTONE'S   MEMORANDUM  141 

But  the  information,  which  I  have  been  allowed 
through  the  kindness  of  Lord  Halifax  to  share, 
altogether  dispels  from  my  mind  every  apprehension 
of  this  kind,  and  convinces  me  that  if  the  investi- 
gations of  the  Curia  did  not  lead  to  a  favourable 
result,  wisdom  and  charity  would  in  any  case  arrest 
them  at  such  a  point  as  to  prevent  their  becoming 
an  occasion  and  a  means  of  embittering  religious 
controversy. 

I  turn,  therefore,  to  the  other  alternative,  and 
assume,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  that  the  judgment 
of  the  examining  tribunal  would  be  found  either  to 
allow  upon  all  points  the  preponderance  of  the  con- 
tentions on  behalf  of  validity,  or  at  the  least  to  place 
beyond  controversy  a  portion  of  the  matters  which 
enter  into  the  essence  of  the  discussion.  I  will  for 
the  present  take  it  for  granted  that  these  fall  under 
three  heads : — 

1.  The  external  competency  of  the  consecrators. 

2.  The   external   sufficiency   of  the  commission 
they  have  conferred. 

3.  That  sufficiency  of  intention  which  the  nth 
Canon  of  the  Council  of  Trent  appears  to  require. 

Under  the  first  head  the  examination  would  of 
course  include,  in  addition  to  the  consecration  of 
Parker  and  the  competency  of  his  consecrators,  the 
several  cases  in  which  consecrators  outside  the 
English  line  have  participated  in  the  consecrations 
of  Anglican  bishops,  and  have  in  this  manner 
furnished  independent  grounds  for  the  assertion  of 
validity.  Even  the  dismissal  from  the  controversy 
of  any  one  of  these  three  heads  would  be  in  the 
nature  of  an  advance  towards  concord,  and  would  be 
so  far  a  reward  for  the  labours  of  His  Holiness, 


142     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Pope  Leo  XIII,  in  furtherance  of  truth  and  peace. 
But  I  may  be  permitted  to  contemplate  for  a 
moment,  as  possible  or  likely,  even  the  full  acknow- 
ledgment that,  without  reference  to  any  other  real 
or  supposed  points  of  controversy,  the  simple  abstract 
validity  of  Anglican  consecrations  is  not  subject  to 
reasonable  doubt. 

And  now  I  must  take  upon  me  to  speak  in  the 
only  capacity  in  which  it  can  be  warrantable  for  me 
to  intervene  in  a  discussion  properly  belonging  to 
persons  of  competent  authority.  That  is  the  capacity 
of  an  absolutely  private  person,  born  and  baptized 
in  the  Anglican  Church,  accepting  his  lot  there  as 
is  the  duty  of  all  who  do  not  find  that  she  has  for- 
feited her  original  and  inherent  privilege  and  place. 
I  may  add  that  my  case  is  that  of  one  who  has  been 
led,  by  the  circumstances  both  of  his  private  and  of 
his  public  career,  to  a  lifelong  and  rather  close 
observation  of  her  character,  her  fortunes,  and  the 
part  she  has  to  play  in  the  grand  history  of  Redemp- 
tion. Thus  it  is  that  her  public  interests  are  also 
his  personal  interest,  and  that  they  require  or  justify 
what  is  no  more  than  his  individual  thought  upon 
them. 

He  is  not  one  of  those  who  look  for  an  early 
restitution  of  such  a  Christian  unity  as  that  which 
marked  the  earlier  history  of  the  Church.  Yet  he 
ever  cherishes  the  belief  that  work  may  be  done  in 
that  direction,  which,  if  not  majestic  or  imposing, 
may  nevertheless  be  legitimate  and  solid  ;  and  this 
by  the  least  as  well  as  by  the  greatest. 

It  is  the  Pope  who,  as  the  first  Bishop  of 
Christendom,  has  the  noblest  sphere  of  action ;  but 
the  humblest  of  the  Christian  flock  has  his  place  of 


MR.  GLADSTONE'S   MEMORANDUM  143 

daily  duty,  and,  according  as  he  fills  it,  helps  to 
make  or  mar  every  good  and  holy  work. 

In  this  character  the  writer  has  viewed  with 
profound  and  thankful  satisfaction,  during  the  last 
half  century  and  more,  the  progressive  advance  of  a 
great  work  of  restoration  in  Christian  doctrine.  It 
has  not  been  wholly  confined  within  his  own  country 
to  the  Anglican  Communion  ;  but  it  is  best  that  he 

o 

should  speak  of  that  which  has  been  most  under  his 
eye.  Within  these  limits  it  has  not  been  confined 
to  doctrine,  but  has  extended  to  Christian  life  and 
all  its  workings.  The  aggregate  result  has  been 
that  it  has  brought  the  Church  of  England  from  a 
state  externally  of  halcyon  calm,  but  inwardly  of 
deep  stagnation,  to  one  in  which,  while  buffeted 
more  or  less  by  external  storms,  subjected  to  some 
peculiar  and  searching  forms  of  trial,  and  even  now 
by  no  means  exempt  from  internal  dissensions,  she 
sees  her  clergy  transformed  (for  this  is  the  word 
which  may  advisedly  be  used),  her  vital  energies 
enlarged  and  still  growing  in  every  direction,  and  a 
store  of  bright  hopes  accumulated  that  she  may  be 
able  to  contribute  her  share,  and  even  possibly  no 
mean  share,  towards  the  consummation  of  the  work 
of  the  Gospel  in  the  world. 

Now  the  contemplation  of  these  changes  by  no 
means  uniformly  ministers  to  our  pride.  They  in- 
volve large  admissions  of  collective  fault.  This  is 
not  the  place,  and  I  am  not  the  proper  organ,  for 
exposition  in  detail.  But  I  may  mention  the  wide- 
spread depression  of  Evangelical  doctrine,  the  in- 
sufficient exhibition  of  the  Person  and  work  of  the 
Redeemer,  the  coldness  and  deadness  as  well  as 
the  infrequency  of  public  worship,  the  relegation  of 


144     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

the  Holy  Eucharist  to  impoverished  ideas,  and  to  the 
place  of  one  (though  doubtless  a  solemn  one)  among 
its  occasional  incidents,  the  gradual  effacement  of 
Church  observance  from  personal  and  daily  life. 
In  all  these  respects  there  has  been  a  profound 
alteration,  which  is  still  progressive,  and  which, 
apart  from  occasional  extravagance  or  indiscretion, 
has  indicated  a  real  advance  in  the  discipline  of 
souls,  and  in  the  work  of  God  on  behalf  of  man. 
A  single-minded  allegiance  to  truth  sometimes 
exacts  admissions  which  may  be  turned  to  account 
for  the  purpose  of  inflicting  polemical  disadvantage. 
Such  an  admission  I  must  now  record.  It  is  not  to 
be  denied  that  a  very  large  part  of  these  improve- 
ments has  lain  in  a  direction  which  has  diminished 
the  breadth  of  separation  between  ourselves  and 
the  authorized  teaching  of  the  unreformed  Church 
both  in  East  and  West,  so  that,  while  on  the  one 
hand  they  were  improvements  in  religious  doctrine 
and  life,  on  the  other  hand  they  were  testimonials 
recorded  against  ourselves  and  in  favour  of  bodies 
outside  our  own  precinct — that  is  to  say,  they  were 
valuable  contributions  to  the  cause  of  Christian 
reunion. 

With  sorrow  we  noted  that,  so  far  as  the 
Western  Church  was  concerned,  its  only  public  and 
corporate  movements,  especially  in  1870,  seemed  to 
meet  the  approximations  made  among  us  with  some- 
thing of  recession  from  us.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to 
open  further  this  portion  of  the  subject ;  "  redeunt 
Saturnia  regna."  Certain  publications  of  learned 
French  priests,  unsuspected  in  their  orthodoxy, 
which  went  to  affirm  the  validity  of  Anglican 
ordinations,  naturally  excited  much  interest  in  this 


MR.  GLADSTONE'S   MEMORANDUM  145 

country  and  elsewhere.  But  there  was  nothing  in 
them  to  ruffle  the  Roman  atmosphere  or  invest  the 
subject,  in  the  circles  of  the  Vatican,  with  the 
character  of  administrative  urgency. 

When,  therefore,  it  came  to  be  understood  that 
Pope  Leo  XIII  had  given  his  commands  that  the 
validity  of  Anglican  ordinations  should  form  the 
subject  of  an  historical  and  theological  investigation, 
it  was  impossible  not  to  be  impressed  with  the  pro- 
found interest  of  the  considerations  brought  into 

o 

view  by  such  a  step,  if  interpreted  in  accordance 
with  just  reason,  as  an  effort  towards  the  abatement 
of  controversial  differences. 

There  was,  indeed,  in  my  view  a  subject  of 
thought,  anterior  to  any  scrutiny  of  the  question 
upon  its  intrinsic  merits,  which  deeply  impressed 
itself  upon  my  mind.  Religious  controversies  do 
not,  like  bodily  wounds,  heal  by  the  genial  force  of 
nature.  If  they  do  not  proceed  to  gangrene  and  to 
mortification,  at  least  they  tend  to  harden  into  fixed 
facts,  to  incorporate  themselves  with  law,  character, 
and  tradition — nay,  even  with  language  ;  so  that  at 
last  they  take  rank  among  the  data  and  presupposi- 
tions of  common  life,  and  are  thought  as  inexpugn- 
able as  the  rocks  of  an  ironbound  coast.  A  poet  of 
ours  describes  the  sharp  and  total  severance  of  two 
early  friends  : — 

They  parted — ne'er  to  meet  again  ! 
But  never  either  found  another 
To  free  the  hollow  heart  from  paining — 
They  stood  aloof,  the  scars  remaining, 
Like  cliffs  which  had  been  rent  asunder ; 
A  dreary  sea  now  rolls  between.1 

1  COLERIDGE'S  Ckristabel. 


146     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Let  us  remember  that  we  are  now  far  advanced 
in  the  fourth  century  since  the  Convocation  of 
Canterbury  under  Warham,  in  1531,  passed  its 
canon  or  resolution  on  the  royal  governorship  of 
the  Church. 

How  much  has  happened  during  those  centuries 
to  inflame  the  strife,  how  little  to  abate  or  quench 
it.  What  courage  must  it  require  in  a  Pope,  what 
an  elevation  above  all  the  levels  of  stormy  partisan- 
ship, what  genuineness  of  love  for  the  whole  Chris- 
tian flock,  whether  separated  or  annexed,  to  enable 
him  to  approach  the  huge  mass  of  hostile  and  still 
burning  recollections,  in  the  spirit  and  for  the  pur- 
poses of  peace. 

And  yet  that  is  what  Pope  Leo  XIII  has  done, 
first  in  entertaining  the  question  of  this  inquiry, 
and  secondly  in  determining  and  providing,  by  the 
infusion  both  of  capacity  and  of  impartiality  into 
the  investigating  tribunal,  that  no  instrument  should 
be  overlooked,  no  guarantee  omitted,  for  the  prob- 
able attainment  of  the  truth.  He  who  bears  in 
mind  the  cup  of  cold  water  administered  to  "one 
of  these  little  ones  "  will  surely  record  this  effort, 
stamped  in  its  very  inception  as  alike  arduous  and 
blessed. 

But  what  of  the  advantage  to  be  derived  from 
any  proceeding  which  shall  end,  or  shall  reduce 
within  narrower  bounds,  the  debate  upon  Anglican 
Orders  ?  I  will  put  upon  paper,  with  the  utmost 
deference  to  authority  and  better  judgment,  my 
own  personal  and  individual,  and,  as  I  freely  admit, 
very  insignificant  reply  to  the  question. 

The  one  controversy  which,  according  to  my 
deep  conviction,  overshadows,  and  in  the  last  resort 


MR.  GLADSTONE'S   MEMORANDUM  147 

absorbs,  all  others  is  the  controversy  between  faith 
and  unbelief.  It  is  easy  to  understand  the  reliance 
which  the  loyal  Roman  Catholic  places  upon  the 
vast  organization  and  imposing  belief  and  action  of 
his  Church,  as  his  provision  for  meeting  the  emer- 
gency. But  I  presume  that  even  he  must  feel  that 
the  hundreds  of  millions,  who  profess  the  name  of 
Christ  without  owning  the  authority  of  his  Church, 
must  count  for  something  in  the  case ;  and  that,  the 
more  he  is  able  to  show  their  affirmative  belief 
to  stand  in  consonance  with  his,  the  more  he 
strengthens  both  the  common  cause — for  surely 
there  is  a  common  cause — and  his  own  particular 
position. 

If,  out  of  every  hundred  professing  Christians, 
ninety-nine  assert  amidst  all  their  separate  and 
clashing  convictions  their  belief  in  the  central 
doctrines  of  the  Trinity  and  the  Incarnation,  will 
not  every  member  of  each  particular  Church  or 
community  be  forward  to  declare,  will  not  the 
candid  unbeliever  be  disposed  freely  to  admit,  that 
this  unity  amidst  diversity  is  a  great  confirmation 
of  the  faith  and  a  broad  basis  on  which  to  build  our 
hopes  of  the  future  ? 

I  now  descend  to  a  level  which,  if  lower  than 
that  of  these  transcendent  doctrines,  is  still  a  lofty 
level. 

The  historical  transmission  of  the  truth  by  a 
visible  Church  with  ah  ordained  constitution  is 
a  matter  of  profound  importance  according  to  the 
belief  and  practice  of  fully  three-fourths  of  Christ- 
endom. In  these  three-fourths  I  include  the  An- 
glican Churches,  which  are  probably  required  in 
order  to  make  them  up. 


148     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

It  is  surely  better  for  the  Roman  and  also  the 
Oriental  Church  to  find  the  Churches  of  the  Anglican 
succession  standing  side  by  side  with  them  in  the 
assertion  of  what  they  deem  an  important  Christian 
principle,  than  to  be  obliged  to  regard  them  as  mere 
pretenders  in  this  behalf,  and  pro  tanto  to  reduce 
the  "cloud  of  witnesses"  willing  and  desirous  to 
testify  on  behalf  of  the  principle.  These  con- 
siderations of  advantage  must,  of  course,  be  sub- 
ordinated to  historic  truth,  but  for  the  moment 
advantage  is  the  point  with  which  I  deal. 

I  attach  no  such  value  to  these  reflections  as 
would  warrant  my  tendering  them  for  the  con- 
sideration of  any  responsible  person,  much  less  of 
one  laden  with  the  cares  and  responsibilities  of  the 
highest  position  in  the  Christian  Church. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  is  nothing  in  them 
which  requires  that  they  should  shrink  from  the 
light.  They  simply  indicate  the  views  of  one  who 
has  passed  a  very  long  life  in  rather  intimate  con- 
nection with  the  Church  of  this  country,  with  its 
rulers,  its  members,  and  its  interests.  I  may  add 
that  my  political  life  has  brought  me  much  into 
contact  with  those  independent  religious  communi- 
ties which  supply  an  important  religious  factor  in 
the  religious  life  of  Great  Britain,  and  which, 
speaking  generally,  while  they  decline  to  own  the 
authority  either  of  the  Roman  or  of  the  National 
Church,  yet  still  allow  to  what  they  know  as  the 
established  religion  no  inconsiderable  hold  upon 
their  sympathies. 

In  conclusion,  it  is  not  for  me  to  say  what  will 
be  the  upshot  of  the  proceedings  now  in  progress 
at  Rome.  But  be  their  issue  what  it  may,  there  is, 


MR.  GLADSTONE'S   MEMORANDUM  149 

in  my  view,  no  room  for  doubt  as  to  the  attitude 
which  has  been  taken  by  the  actual  head  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  in  regard  to  them.  It 
seems  to  me  an  attitude  in  the  largest  sense 
paternal ;  and  while  it  will  probably  stand  among 
the  latest  recollections  of  my  lifetime,  it  will  ever 
be  cherished  with  cordial  sentiments  of  reverence, 
of  gratitude,  and  of  high  appreciation. 

W.  E.  GLADSTONE. 
HAWARDEN,  May,  1896. 


THE    ROYAL    MANDATE    FOR 
BARLOWS  CONSECRATION 


V 


THE    ROYAL    MANDATE    FOR 
BARLOW'S   CONSECRATION 


Memorandum  delivered  to   Cardinal  Mazzella  a 

Eminentissmie  et  Reverendissime  Domine, 

A 5 H INC  paucos  dies  telegramma  viro  rev.  L. 
Duchesne  dedi,  quo  confrater  meus  E.  G.  Wood 
mihi  renuntiarat  se  mandatum  regium  pro  conse- 
cratione  Barlovi  repperisse. 

Hodie  ipsius  documenti  apographum  ab  eodem 
E.  G.  Wood  recepi,  una  cum  expositione  modi  quo 
huiusmodi  instrumenta  tempore  Henrici  VIII  ex- 
pediebantur  atque  in  archivis  reponebantur,  de  qua 
re  diligentissimam  apud  ipsa  archiva  inquisitionem 
instituit.  Quae  ille  docuit  in  formam  sequentem 
redegi. 

luxta  statutum  25  Hen.  VIII  cap.  20,  de  electione 
et  consecratione  episcoporum  anno  1533  factum, 
provisum  est  ut  rex  de  electione  certior  factus/^r 
litter  as  patentes  sub  magno  sigillo  praedictam  elec- 
tionem  archiepiscopo  ac  metropolitae  provinciae  signi- 
ficaret ;  rogando  ac  mandando  ut  archiepiscopus,  cui 
talia  significarenlur,  praedictam  electionem  confirm- 

1  See  Diary,  April  igth,  22nd,  28th  ;  May  I2th  ;  and  Letters  of 
May  6th,  7th,  8th,  and  i6th. 

153 


154     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

aret,  et  praedictam  personam  ita  electam  ad  munus 
et  dignitatem  faiiusmodi  investiret  et  consecraret, 
eique  omnes  benedictiones  daret,  omnibusque  caere- 
moniis  aliisque  rebus  uteretur  quae  in  hac  parte 
necessaria  forent.1  Quae  ut  mature  intelligantur 
necesse  erit  quaedam  de  modo  Litterarum  Patentium 
expediendarum  exponere. 

Primo  igitur  litterae  brevissime  redactae  sub 
Signatura  Manuali  ipsius  regis  parabantur,  quae 
ad  Custodem  Sigilli  Privati  intra  octo  dies  mitte- 
bantur.  Ille  instrumentum  completis  clausulis 
parabat,  cuius  duo  apographa  facta  sunt,  alterum, 
cui  rubrica  erat  Per  breve  sub  Sigillo  Privato  in 
archivis  Sigilli  Privati  conservandum,  alterum  cui 
rubrica  Sub  Sigillo  Privato  ipsumque  sigillum  im- 
pressum  est.  Hoc  autem  Summo  Cancellario 
datum  est,  cum  praefatione  de  Litteris  Patentibus 
sub  Magno  Sigillo  expediendis.  Quo  recepto  ille 
instrumentum  defmitivum  parandum  curabat,  cuius 
iterum  duo  apographa  facta  sunt ;  alterum  in  Rotulis 
Patentibus  apud  archiva  cancellariatus  conservan- 
dum, alterum  quod  Magno  Sigillo  impressum 
tanquam  Litterae  Patentes  ipsi  personae  missum  est 
cui  rex  actu  rescribere  voluisset. 

Ex    dictis    patet    quinque   instrumenta   exstare 


1  The  king's  Highness,  by  his  letters  patent  under  his  great  seal, 
shall  signifie  the  said  election,  if  it  be  to  the  dignity  of  a  bishop,  to  the 
archbishop  and  metropolitane  of  the  Province  where  the  see  of  the 
said  bishoprick  was  void,  if  the  see  of  the  said  archbishop  be  full  and 
not  void  :  and  if  it  be  void,  then  to  any  other  archbishop  within  this 
realm  or  in  any  other  the  king's  dominions  ;  requiring  and  command- 
ing such  archbishop,  to  whom  any  such  signification  shall  be  made, 
to  confirm  the  said  election,  and  to  invest  and  consecrate  the  said 
person  so  elected  to  the  office  and  dignity  that  he  is  elected  unto,  and 
to  give  and  use  to  him  all  such  benedictions,  ceremonies,  and  other 
things  requisite  for  the  same. 


MANDATE   FOR   BARLOW'S   CONSECRATION      155 

possunt,  ex  quibus  certissimo  appareat  huiusmodi 
Litteras  Patentes  expeditas  fuisse.  Haec  sunt:  i° 
Breve  sub  Signatura  Manuali,  quod  in  archivis 
Sigilli  Privati,  sub  titulo  generali  Signed  Bills  con- 
servari  solet :  2°  Instrumentum  Per  breve  sub  Sigillo 
Private  in  eisdern  archivis  conservatum  :  3°  In- 
strumentum Sub  Sigillo  Private  a  Cancellario  re- 
ceptum  et  in  eius  archivis  repositum :  4°  Litterae 
Patentes  sub  Magno  Sigillo  actu  emissae  :  5°  Apo- 
graphum  earundem  litterarum  in  Rotulis  Patentibus 
conservatum.  Ipsae  igitur  Litterae  Patentes  in 
possessionem  eius  cui  directae  sunt  tradebantur ; 
alia  instrumenta  omnia  in  archivis  reperiri  debent. 
Tempore  autem  de  quo  agitur  depositiones  in 
archivis  incuriosissime  fiebant ;  nee  facile  invenietur 
casus  in  quo  omnia  huiusmodi  usque  hodie  asser- 
vantur.  Quod  si  vel  unum  ex  his  instrumentis 
inveniatur,alia  necessario  expedita  fuisse  manifestum 
est. 

Quid  ergo  de  Barlovi  promotione  habemus  ? 
Primum  ex  istis  instrumentis,  quod  et  aliorum 
fons  et  origo  est,  adhuc  in  archivis  invenitur.1 
Tale  est  : 

"  Henry  R. 

Rex  reverendissimo  in  Christo  patri  Thomae 
Cantuar.  archiepiscopo  totius  Angliae  primati  salu- 
tem.  Sciatis  quod  electioni  nuper  factae  in  ecclesia 
Cathedrali  Meneven.  per  mortem  bonae  memoriae 
dom.  Richardi  Rawlyns  ultimi  episcopi  ibidem 
vacante  de  reverendo  in  Christo  patre  dom. 
Willelmo  Barlow  sacrae  theologiae  professore  tune 

1  "Privy  seals  Bundle,"  April,  1536. 


156     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

episcopo  Assaven.  et  Mon.  de  Bisham  Sarum  dioec. 
commendatorio  perpetuo  in  episcopum  loci  illius  et 
pastorem  regium  assensum  adhibuimus  et  favorem, 
et  hoc  vobis  tenore  praesentium  significamus  ut 
quod  vestrum  est  in  hac  parte  exequamini.  In 
cuius  etc.  Teste  etc." 

Hoc  igitur  dato  instrumento  necesse  erat  ut 
Gustos  Sigilli  Privati  litteras  iuxta  morem  completas 
redigendas  curaret.  In  his  autem  clausulae  quae 
sub  Signatura  Manuali  brevius  expressae  erant 
plenis  phrasibus  expansae  sunt.  Inter  alia  sensus 
verborum  "  ut  quod  vestrum  cst  in  hac  parte  exequa- 
mini" a  scriptoribus  iuxta  normam  scribendi  ita 
exprimitur  : — "  Rogantes  et  in  fide  et  dilectione 
quibus  vos  tenemini  firmiter  vobis  mandantes 
quatenus  praefatum  Willelmum  Barlow  Episcopum 
Menevensem  electum  confirmare  et  eundem  Willel- 
mum in  Episcopum  Menevensem  consecrare  ipsum- 
que  prout  moris  est  episcopalibus  insigniis  investire, 
ceteraque  peragere  quae  vestro  in  hac  parte  in- 
cumbant  officio  pastorali  iuxta  formam  statuti  in  ea 
parte  editi  et  provisi  velitis  diligenter  cum  effectu." 
Ex  instrumento  ita  elaborate  Litterae  Patentes  intra 
paucos  dies  expedirentur  necesse  erat,  ut  omnia 
secundum  leges  fierent.1 

Nihil  ex  his  nisi  solum  Breve  sub  Signatura 
Manuali  repertum  est.  Sed  ex  hoc  omnia  dependent, 
et  notissimum  est  ex  registro  Cranmeri  eum  Litteras 
huiusmodi  Patentes  recepisse,  et  iuxta  earum  ten- 
orem  Barlovi  electionem  die  2 1  Aprilis  confirmasse. 
Quo  die  ad  consecrationem  perrexerit  ignoramus. 

1  This  paragraph  is  altogether  inaccurate.  For  the  correction  of  the 
mistake,  see  the  two  letters  to  the  Tablet,  here  following. 


MANDATE   FOR   BARLOW'S   CONSECRATION      157 

Haec  si  ad  quaestionem  aliquam  dirimendam 
utilia  fuerint  Eminentiae  vestrae  humillime  sub- 
mittit 

Eminentiae  vestrae 

Servus  in  Christo  observantissimus 

T.  A.  LACEY. 

Romae  in  via  dicta  del  Tritone  36 
13  Maii  1896. 


II 

Letters  to  the  Editor  of  the  "  Tablet." 

SIR, — I  am  now  in  a  position  to  place  before 
your  readers  the  results  of  some  further  investiga- 
tion of  the  Royal  Mandate  for  Consecration. 

It  may  be  well  to  recall  the  origin  of  the  question. 
Father  Sydney  Smith  in  a  pamphlet,  and  Canon 
Moyes  in  your  columns,  contended  that  in  the  case 
of  Barlow  all  documents  relating  to  election  are 
extant,  all  relating  to  consecration  are  missing. 
Among  others  they  showed  the  Royal  Assent  to  the 
election  as  extant,  the  Royal  Mandate  for  the  con- 
secration as  missing.  They  took  these  to  be  two 
separate  documents,  the  former  required  by  old 
custom  anterior  to  the  Act  of  1533,  the  latter  re- 
quired by  the  terms  of  that  Act. 

I  replied  in  my  Siipplementum  that  these  two  are 
one  and  the  same  thing  ;  to  speak  more  strictly,  any 
writ  of  Royal  Assent  is  also  a  Mandate  for  Consecra- 
tion. I  made  one  considerable  mistake  in  the  state- 
ment of  my  case,  which  I  will  correct  lower  down. 

I  have  already  shown  that  it  is  a  mistake  to 
suppose  a  writ  of  Assent  to  have  been  in  use  before 


158     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

the  Act  of  1533.  For  more  than  a  century  promo- 
tions had  all  been  made  by  Provision,  and  there  was 
no  occasion  for  such  a  writ.  The  Act  of  1533 
(25  H.  VIII,  cap.  20)  is,  therefore,  our  starting 
point.  By  this  Act  the  form  of  capitular  election 
was  restored,  subject  to  the  Royal  License  or 
congt-d'eslire.  The  election  was  to  be  reported  by 
the  Chapter  to  the  King.  The  procedure  then  to 
be  followed  is  carefully  set  out  in  the  Act.  "  The 
King's  Highness,  by  his  Letters  Patents  under  his 
great  seal,  shall  signify  the  said  election,  if  it  be  to 
the  dignity  of  a  Bishop,  to  the  Archbishop  and 
Metropolitan  of  the  Province  where  the  See  of  the 
said  Bishoprick  was  void,  if  the  See  of  the  said 
Archbishop  he  full  and  not  void :  and  if  it  be  void, 
then  to  any  other  Archbishop  within  this  Realm, 
or  in  any  other  the  King's  Dominions ;  requiring 
and  commanding  such  Archbishop,  to  whom  any 
such  signification  shall  be  made,  to  confirm  the  said 
election,  and  to  invest  and  consecrate  the  said 
person  so  elected  to  the  office  and  dignity  that  he 
is  elected  unto,  and  to  give  and  use  to  him  all  such 
benedictions,  ceremonies,  and  other  things  requisite 
for  the  same,  without  any  suing,  procuring,  or 
obtaining  any  Bulls,  Letters,  or  other  things  from 
the  See  of  Rome  for  the  same  in  any  behalf."  The 
next  section  provides  that  the  election  of  an  Arch- 
bishop is  in  like  manner  to  be  certified  to  some 
Archbishop  with  two  other  Bishops,  or  to  four 
Bishops. 

In    carrying    out    these    provisions,    what    pre- 
cedents had  the  King's  advisers  to  go  on  ? 

i.  There   was   a   writ  in    common    use    for  the 
Royal  Assent  to  the  election  of  certain  Abbots  and 


MANDATE   FOR   BARLOW'S  CONSECRATION      159 

Priors.  This  writ  went  to  the  Bishop  of  the 
diocese  where  the  convent  was  situated,  signifying 
to  him  the  election,  "ut  quod  vestrum  est  in  hac 
parte  exequamini."  That  is  to  say  he  was  ordered 
to  invest  and  institute  the  elect. 

2.  In  earlier  days,  when  capitular  election  was 
still  in  force  but  confirmations  had  been  reserved 
to  the  Roman  Court,  the  King  signified  his  assent 
to  the  Pope,  praying  him  to  do  his  part.     Such  a 
letter  of  the  year  1374  is  extant,  in  which  the  King 
signifies  to  the  Pope  his  assent  to  the  election  of 
Neville  to  York. 

3.  In  the  year   1416,  during  the  Great  Schism, 
no    Pope   was    recognized   in    England.      In   con- 
sequence,  the    King,  with  the  special    consent   of 
Parliament,    authorized    Chichele,    the    Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  to  confirm  the  election  of  Wakering 
to  Norwich.    The  writs  are  extant,  setting  forth  the 

o 

reasons  for  the  unusual  course  taken  and  ordering 
the  Archbishop  "  omnia  quae  vestro  canonico  in- 
cumbunt  officio  in  hac  parte  peragatis  et  exequamini" 
(Rymer  ix.,  337-338).  Wakering's  writ  of  Restitu- 
tion recites  that  this  has  been  done.  The  writs  of 
Restitution  recite  the  same  procedure  in  the  cases 
of  Chandler  of  Sarum,  and  Lacey  of  Exeter,  but 
the  patents  apparently  are  not  extant  (Ibid.  450- 

539). 

These  are  the  precedents.  When  we  examine 
the  writs  actually  issued  during  the  years  immedi- 
ately following  the  Act  we  find  an  extraordinary 
variety  of  practice.  Sometimes  the  above  pre- 
cedents, one  and  three,  were  followed  pretty  closely  ; 
the  vacation  and  election  are  recited,  the  King's 
assent  is  signified,  and  the  Archbishop  is  simply 


160     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

directed  to  do  his  duty,  "ut  quod  vestrum  est  in  hac 
parte  ulterius  exequamini  cum  effectu."  Minor  varia- 
tions in  the  wording  are  frequent,  as  was  natural  in 
a  new  writ,  not  of  common  use.  This  I  will  call 
the  shorter  form. 

At  other  times  an  entirely  new  form  was  used, 
which  adopted  a  good  deal  of  the  wording  of  the  Act, 
the  Archbishop  being  specifically  directed  to  confirm 
and  consecrate.  Allowance  made  for  variations,  the 
following  is  the  ordinary  style  :  "  Rogantes  et  man- 
dantes  quatenus  praefatam  electionem  ipsumque  N. 
electum  confirmare  et  eundem  N.  consecrare,  ip- 
sumque prout  moris  est  episcopalibus  insigniis  in- 
vestire,  ceteraque  peragere  quae  vestro  in  hac  parte 
ofificio  pastorali  incumbunt  iuxta  formam  statuti  in 
ea  parte  editi  et  provisi  velitis  diligenter  cum 
effectu."  I  will  call  this  the  longer  form. 

Two  Bishops  however,  Lee  of  Lichfield  in 
1534  and  Fox  of  Hereford  in  1535,  had  writs 
drawn  in  a  form  altogether  exceptional.  A  third 
common  form  was  afterwards  introduced,  directing 
confirmation  and  consecration  in  general  terms, 
which  appears  to  have  completely  ousted  the 
shorter  form. 

The  first  and  second  of  these  forms  —  the 
shorter  and  the  longer — are  those  which  have 
been  distinguished  as  the  Assent  to  the  Election, 
and  the  Mandate  Jor  Consecration.  Both  were 
supposed  to  be  required.  But  on  carefully  reading 
the  Act  one  sees  that  only  one  instrument  is  re- 
quired, in  which  the  King  shall  at  once  signify  his 
assent  to  the  election,  and  direct  the  Archbishop  to 
proceed.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  in  some  cases  one 
Patent  was  issued,  in  other  cases  two ;  sometimes 


MANDATE   FOR   BARLOW'S  CONSECRATION      161 

the  shorter  form  alone,  sometimes  the  longer  alone, 
sometimes  both ;  sometimes,  as  I  have  said,  a 
special  form. 

Here  I  wish  to  acknowledge  the  mistake  into 
which  I  fell  when  writing  my  Supplementum.  I 
assumed  that  in  no  case  were  the  two  forms  of  the 
writ  issued.  My  mistake  was  due  to  my  misunder- 
standing part  of  the  information  sent  to  me,  and 
this  again  was  due  to  the  fixed  idea,  derived  from 
Father  Sydney  Smith's  pamphlet,  that  the  shorter 
form  was  a  writ  of  common  use,  expanded  for  the 
purposes  of  the  Act  of  1533  into  the  longer  form. 
I  was  clearly  in  error,  since  in  some  cases  both 
were  issued.  But  I  have  not  yet  been  able  to 
determine  the  true  relation  between  the  two,  or 
the  reason  why,  in  some  cases,  both  were  issued. 
My  contention,  however,  that  they  are  not  rightly 
distinguished  as  Assent  to  Election  and  Mandate 
to  Consecrate  is  absolutely  established  by  further 
investigation. 

I  have  been  trying,  with  the  help  of  Rymer, 
Gairdner's  Catalogue,  and  Cranmer's  Register,  to 
determine  precisely  what  was  done  in  each  case 
during  the  first  few  years  after  the  passing  of  the 
Act — the  period  of  Barlow's  promotion.  The  task 
is  far  from  complete,  but  the  facts  already  ascertained 
are  sufficient  to  prove  my  contention. 

The  manner  in  which  the  copies  of  the  writs 
appear  in  the  Register  is  of  capital  importance.  In 
the  case  of  each  promotion  recorded — there  are,  as 
is  well  known,  several  omissions — the  Register  con- 
tains an  elaborate  and  detailed  account  of  the 
Confirmation,  in  which  are  incorporated,  with  other 
instruments,  the  Patents  which  we  are  considering. 

M 


1 62     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Afterwards  the  Consecration  is  recorded  in  a  brief 
entry  of  about  five  lines — often  omitted,  as  notably 
in  the  cases  of  Sampson,  Reppis,  and  Barlow — 
without  any  details  or  documents.  The  Patents, 
whether  one  or  two,  whatever  their  form,  are  thus 
included  in  the  Acts  of  the  Confirmation,  and  they 
are  all  alike  entitled  in  the  margin,  Litterae  Patentes 
regiae  Majestatis  super  assens^l  suo.  One  sees  at 
once  how  inaccurate  it  is  to  describe  any  of  them 
as  specifically  Mandates  for  Consecration.  That 
term  belongs  indeed  to  a  later  period,  when  under 
Edward  VI  capitular  elections  were  abolished,  and 
the  king  appointed  to  a  bishopric  by  Letters  Patent, 
commanding  the  Archbishop  simply  to  consecrate, 
the  only  duty  remaining  to  him. 

To  the  ordering  of  the  Register  which  I  have 
here  described  there  is  only  one  exception. 
Shaxton,  promoted  to  Sarum  in  1535,  received 
two  Patents,  but  the  second  was  not  issued  until 
four  days  after  his  confirmation.  This  writ  is 
therefore  not  included  in  the  Acts  of  the  Con- 
firmation, but  is  copied  in  the  Register  after 
them. 

So  far  I  have  shown  only  that  the  Longer  Form 
is  not  specifically  a  Mandate  for  Consecration,  as 
distinguished  from  the  Shorter  Form.  But  my 
position  proves  to  be  stronger  than  I  thought. 
The  combined  evidence  of  the  Records  and  the 
Register  proves  that  the  Shorter  Form  by  itself 
was  a  sufficient  mandate  according  to  the  terms 
of  the  Act.  As  I  have  said,  in  some  promotions 
only  one  Patent  was  issued.  Four  of  these,  occur- 
ring within  a  few  weeks,  are  Barlow  to  St.  Asaph, 
Barlow  to  St.  Davids,  Sampson  to  Chichester,  and 


MANDATE   FOR   BARLOW'S   CONSECRATION     163 

Reppis  to  Norwich.     In  all  these  cases  the  Shorter 
Form  only  was  used.     Here  are  the  references  : 

Barlow  to  St.  Asaph.  Patent  dated  February 
22,  1536.  Gairdner,  392  (45):  Cranmer's  Reg. 
i  Sob. 

Barlow  to  St.  Davids.  Dated  April  20,  1536,  G. 
775  (27) ;  Reg.  205  a. 

Sampson  to  Chichester.  Dated  die  xi  junii, 
1536  (an  obvious  error  for  ix,  since  he  was  con- 
firmed with  Reppis  on  June  10).  G.  1256  (19); 
Reg.  189  b. 

Reppis  to  Norwich.  Dated  June  9,  1536,  G. 
1256  (12) ;  Reg.  209  a.1 

In  these  cases  Cranmer  proceeded  to  confirm 
and  consecrate  on  the  authority  of  this  Shorter 
Form  alone.  Setting  aside  Barlow,  it  is  certain 
that  he  consecrated  Sampson  and  Reppis  on 
June  ii.  But  he  had  no  power  to  act  at  all, 
either  to  confirm  or  to  consecrate,  except  on  the 
authority  of  a  mandate  given  in  accordance  with 
the  Act.  Therefore  the  Shorter  Form  is  such  a 
mandate. 

The  contention,  then,  which  I  put  forward  is 
supported  by  further  investigation.  The  distinc- 
tion between  the  Assent  to  the  Election  and  the 
Mandate  to  Consecrate  is  unreal.  The  Royal  man- 
date to  consecrate  Barlow  was  issued  in  one  of  the 
forms  then  current,  and  is  now  extant. 

Upon  the  relation  of  the  two  forms  to  each 
other,  and  the  reason  why  sometimes  both  were 
issued,  I  have  found  no  further  light.  In  view, 
however,  of  that  which  I  have  determined,  this 
question  is  one  of  little  more  than  antiquarian  in- 
1  Inaccurate.  See  the  next  Letter. 


164     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

terest.     If  I  have  time  to  pursue  it  further,  perhaps 
you  will  allow  me  to  give  your  readers  the  result. 

T.  A.  LACEY. 
MADINGLEY,  August  31,  1896. 

SIR, — Insinuations  of  bad  faith  add  neither 
dignity  to  a  controversy  nor  strength  to  an  argu- 
ment, and  so,  while  always  regretting  their  appear- 
ance, I  would  rather  be  their  object  than  their 
author  ;  nor  do  I  fear  the  general  verdict.1  There 
are,  however,  two  suggestions  of  this  kind  which  I 
would  rather  not  pass  over.  The  writer  of  your 
article  has  said  that  my  reply  involved  the  suppres- 
sion of  one  hypothesis  and  "  the  tacit  substitution  of 
another."  Tacit  /  I  thought  I  had  in  the  most 
express  terms  acknowledged  the  mistake  to  which 
he  refers,  and  called  attention  to  the  explanation 
substituted.  Again,  after  quoting  the  terms  of  the 
longer  form  of  assent,  you  wonder  "how  Mr.  Lacey 
could,  with  these  words  before  him,  deny  that  this 

This  was  written,  I  must  admit,  in  the  true  controversial  style. 
I  do  not  know  what  right  I  had  to  assume  this  tone  of  superiority.  I 
had  been  correcting  a  mistake  with  elaborate  detail,  a  procedure 
which  almost  inevitably  engenders  suspicion.  But  the  detail  was 
necessary,  for  a  mere  acknowledgment  of  the  mistake  would  have 
been  misleading.  Stated  simply,  and  without  detail,  the  case  was  as 
follows :  Two  documents  were  known,  commonly  distinguished  as 
the  Assent  to  Election  and  the  Mandate  to  Consecrate.  Moved  by 
the  suggestion  of  Sir  Walter  Phillimore  that  the  Act  of  Henry  VIII 
required  only  one  such  document  (Diary,  April  igth),  I  made  a 
further  study  of  the  matter  with  imperfect  information  at  my  disposal, 
came  to  the  erroneous  conclusion  that  the  Assent  was  merely  a 
preliminary  draft  of  the  Mandate,  and  too  hastily  communicated  this 
conclusion  to  Cardinal  Mazzella,  publishing  it  also  in  the  Stipple- 
mentum.  It  was,  of  course,  challenged.  After  my  return  to  England 
I  made  a  further  examination  of  the  documents  at  first  hand, 
discovering  that  both  were  in  some  cases  issued  as  Letters  Patent,  but 
that  either  of  them  was  an  effective  Mandate  for  consecration  within 
the  meaning  of  the  Act. 


writ  was  a  Mandate  for  Consecration."  You  might 
indeed  wonder,  if  I  had  done  anything  of  the  kind, 
especially  as  my  whole  contention  is  that  either  the 
longer  or  the  shorter  form  is  a  sufficient  mandate 
for  consecration.  What  I  said  was  that  neither  of 
them  is  specifically  a  Mandate  for  Consecration — 
that  is  to  say,  as  the  context  clearly  shows,  for  con- 
secration as  distinct  from  other  incidents  of  the 
promotion. 

Permit  me  to  add  that  if  I  were  all  that  you 
think  me,  still  I  should  not,  in  treating  this  ques- 
tion, be  tempted  to  the  faults  which  you  impute  to 
me.  This  particular  question  has  no  interest  for  me 
but  one  purely  scientific  and  historical.  The  case 
for  Barlow's  consecration  is  that  which  Lingard 
stated  sixty  years  ago,  and  which  nothing  short 
of  direct  negative  proof  can  shake.  If  I  prove 
my  contention  up  to  the  hilt  I  add  nothing  to 
the  strength  of  that  case.  In  this  detached  frame 
of  mind  I  offer  some  criticisms  on  your  last 
article. 

i.  To  show  that  the  shorter  form  of  assent  ex- 
isted before  the  Act  of  1533  you  allege  precedents 
from  the  thirteenth  century.  I  should  have  ex- 
pected something  of  the  kind  at  that  early  period, 
though  I  frankly  admit  I  should  not  have  expected 
anything  so  exactly  similar ;  but  I  did  not  think 
it  necessary  to  push  my  quest  so  far  back.  The 
question  is  whether  this  form  of  writ  was  con- 
tinuously in  use  before  and  after  the  Act.  What 
bearing  upon  this  question  have  precedents  the 
latest  of  which  belongs  to  the  year  1327?  You 
seem  to  allow  that  for  two  hundred  years  before 
the  Act  this  writ  was  not  in  use.  Any  argument 


i66     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

that  might  be  drawn  from  continuous  use  therefore 
disappears. 

2.  You  argue  that  the  shorter  form  could  not 
have  been  a  Mandate  because  it  was  in  use  during 
the  Middle  Ages.  "  In  pre-reformation  times,"  you 
say,  "no  English  king  would,  or  could,  have  com- 
manded the  Primate  to  confirm  or  consecrate  a 
bishop-elect,  and  such  an  attitude  on  the  part  of 
the  lay  power  would  have  been  foreign  to  the 
whole  spirit  of  mediaeval  economy."  It  is  news 
indeed  to  hear  that  mediaeval  kings  were  so  tender 

O 

of  the  susceptibilities  of  bishops.  I  think  I  could 
produce  many  startling  instances  to  the  contrary, 
but  two  may  suffice.  The  period  of  the  Middle 
Ages  is  rather  elastic.  Would  you  refer  to  the 
early  days  ?  There  is  in  Marculfus  an  ordinary 
Indiculus  of  the  Prankish  kings  directing  the 
Metropolitan  to  consecrate  a  bishop :  "  Qua  de  re 
statuta  praesentibus  ordinamus  ut  cum  adunatorum 
caterva  pontificum,  ad  quos  tamen  nostrae  sere- 
nitatis  devotio  scripta  pervenit,  ipsum  ut  ordo  pos- 
tulat  benedicere  vestra  industria  studeat "  (Migne. 
P.  L.,  torn.  87,  col.  704.  Also  in  Labbe,  torn,  viii., 
col.  1865).  Would  you  look  rather  to  a  later 
period?  In  the  year  1416,  Henry  V,  with  the 
consent  of  Parliament,  directs  Chichele  to  confirm 
Wakering  to  Norwich  in  these  terms  :  "  Vobis  man- 
damus quod  ad  confirmationem  praefati  clerici  nostri 
virtute  electionis  sibi  ut  praemittitur  factae  absque 
excusatione  seu  dilatione  aliquali  procedatis,  ac 
caetera  omnia  quae  vestro  canonico  incumbunt 
officio  in  hac  parte  peragatis  et  exequamini "  (Close 
Rolls,  H.  5  ;  m.  23.  Rymer,  ix.,  338).  With  these 
quotations  before  you  I  am  sure  you  will  admit 


MANDATE   FOR   BARLOW'S  CONSECRATION     167 

at  once  that  this  part,  at  least,  of  your  argument 
must  go. 

3.  But,  indeed,  it  is  useless  to  ask  whether  this 
writ  coiild  have  been  a  mandate,  if,  as  I  showed,  it 
was  actually  taken  as  a  mandate.  You,  therefore, 
addressed  yourself  to  my  crucial  cases.  And  first 
as  regards  Sampson,  you  argue  that  since  Cranmer 
certified  to  the  King,  in  express  terms,  that  he  had 
confirmed  and  consecrated  him,  therefore  he  must 
have  received  the  longer  form  of  Assent,  ordering 
this  in  the  same  express  terms.  The  statement  of 
this  argument  really  seems  sufficient  for  its  refuta- 
tion, but  I  happen  to  have  in  hand  a  direct  refutation. 
Cranmer  confirmed  Shaxton  also  on  the  authority  of 
the  shorter  form  only,  and  certified  the  confirmation 
to  the  King  on  March  18,  1535.  The  longer  form  of 
Assent  was  issued  some  days  afterwards  (Cranmer's 
Reg.  172  a).  The  certificate,  then,  clearly  does  not 
imply  the  issue  of  the  longer  writ.  Again  I  am 
sure  you  will  wish  to  acknowledge  the  mistake. 

The  double  confirmation  of  Barlow  himself  on  the 
authority  of  the  shorter  form  must  be  put  aside,  you 
think — and  you  assume  my  agreement — because  the 
question  is  about  his  consecration.  But  to  argue  thus 
you  must  assume  that  a  writ  might  be  good  as  a 
mandate  for  confirmation,  and  not  good  as  a  mandate 
for  consecration.  You  can  find  nothing  in  the  Act 
to  justify  this.  On  the  contrary,  the  Act  speaks  of 
a  single  writ  signifying  the  King's  assent,  and  com- 
manding the  Archbishop  "to  confirm  the  said 
election,  and  to  invest  and  consecrate  the  said  person." 
A  writ  which  was  good  for  one  was  good  for  the 
other,  unless,  perhaps,  in  case  one  or  the  other  were 
expressly  and  exclusively  mentioned.  The  argument, 


168     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

then,  stands  thus.  Cranmer  confirmed  Barlow  on 
the  authority  of  the  shorter  form  of  Assent.  But  he 
could  not  confirm  him  save  on  the  authority  of  a 
mandate  to  confirm  and  consecrate  according  to  the 
Act.  Therefore  the  shorter  form  of  Assent  was 
such  a  mandate. 

So  far,  then,  from  Barlow's  own  case  being 
nothing  to  the  purpose,  I  might  have  proved  my 
contention  on  the  strength  of  that  case  only. 

There  remains  the  case  of  Reppis.  You  reply 
that  in  his  case  the  longer  form  was  actually  issued, 
and  you  give  your  reference  to  the  Patent  Rolls, 
28  Henry  VIII,  p.  2,  m.  27.  I  would  not  for  a 
moment  question  your  categorical  assertion,  but  I 
have  verified  it,  delaying  this  letter  till  I  could  do 
so,  and  I  have  a  real  pleasure  in  making  the  same 
acknowledgment  of  a  mistake  in  this  case  which  I 
invite  you  to  make  in  others. 

Yours  faithfully, 

T.  A.   LACEY. 

MADINGLEY,  September  23. 


JULIUS   III   AND   PAUL   IV 


VI 
JULIUS  III  AND  PAUL  IV 


IN  the  spring  of  the  year  1895,  Dom  Gasquet  discovered 
in  the  Register  of  Paul  IV  a  Bull,  unknown  to  all 
previous  writers  on  our  subject,  dealing  with  the  powers 
delegated  to  Cardinal  Pole  for  the  reconciliation  of  the 
English  Church  to  the  Holy  See.  This  Bull  Praeclara 
carissimi,  and  an  explanatory  Brief  Regimini  universalis, 
were  put  forward  as  (i)  declaring  the  English  Ordinal  to  be 
an  invalid  rite,  and  (2)  being  founded  on  a  "  full  and  minute" 
description  of  that  Ordinal,  furnished  by  Pole  himself. 

On  the  former  head  I  wrote  the  following  Notes,  which 
were  circulated  at  the  Church  Congress  held  at  Norwich  in 
that  year.  The  substance  of  them  was  afterwards  incor- 
porated into  the  Supplementum  de  Hierarchia  Anglicana, 
printed  at  Rome.1 

PAUL  IV  AND  ANGLICAN  ORDERS 

A  good  deal  has  been  said  about  certain  docu- 
ments recently  discovered  by  Dom  Gasquet  in  the 
Vatican  archives,  which  are  put  forward  as  con- 
taining a  papal  reprobation  of  Anglican  Orders. 
They  are  a  Bull  of  Paul  IV,  dated  June  20,  1555, 
and  a  Brief,  dated  October  30,  in  the  same  year. 
Briefly  and  doubtfully  referred  to  in  the  Civilta 
Cattolica  of  last  June,  they  have  since  been  repro- 
duced elsewhere.  What  do  they  contain  ? 

1  See  Diary,  April  loth,  I2th,  and  22nd. 
171 


172     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

The  Bull,  we  find,  is  a  papal  confirmation  of  the 
general  dispensation  given  by  Card.  Pole  on  the 
reconciliation  of  the  kingdom  (printed  in  de 
Hierarchia  Anglic  ana,  App.  vii.),  in  which  the 
Legate  confirmed  a  number  of  things  done  since 
the  rupture  with  Rome,  and  formally  undertook  to 
receive  in  their  several  grades  all  who  had  been 
ordained,  licet  nulliter  et  de  facto?  under  conditions 

1  I  apparently  had  not  then  noticed  the  interesting  word  concernentia 
in  this  Bull.  In  the  extant  text  of  Pole's  General  Dispensation,  incor- 
porated in  the  Act  i  and  2  Phil,  and  Mar.  cap.  8  (Gibson,  p.  41),  the 
Legate  promises  to  receive  "  in  suis  ordinibus  "  all  persons  who  had 
obtained  "aliquas  impetrationes  dispensationes  concessiones  gratias  et 
indulta  tam  ordines  quam  beneficia  ecclesiastica,  seu  alias  spirituales 
materias,  praetensa  auctorilate  supremitatis  Ecclesiae  An glicanae, licet 
nulliter  et  de  facto  obtinuerint."  But  in  the  Bull  Praeclara  the  corre- 
sponding passage  runs  thus  :  "quae  [personae]  diversas  impetrationes 
dispensationes  gratias  et  indulta  tam  ordines  quam  beneficia  ecclesi- 
astica seu  alias  spirituales  materias  concernentia  praetensa  auctoritate 
supremitatis  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae  nulliter  et  de  facto  obtinuerant." 

Thus  the  Bull,  reciting  the  terms  of  the  Dispensation,  adds  the  word 
concernentia,  which  rectifies  both  the  grammar  and  the  sense.  The 
word  had  evidently  slipped  out  of  the  copy  of  the  Dispensation  en- 
grossed in  the  Act  of  Parliament.  But  there  is  a  further  complication. 
An  embassy  was  sent  from  England  seeking  confirmation  of  Pole's  acts 
(infra,  p.  176).  There  is  in  the  Archives  of  the  Vatican  a  Summarium  of 
their  petition  (cited  by  Brand!,  Roma  e  Canterbury,  p.  56,  under  ref. 
Arch.  Vdt.  Arm.  LXIV,  torn.  28,  fol.  199),  according  to  which  they 
desired  the  Holy  See  to  confirm  "  dispensationes  cum  ecclesiasticis 
personis  secularibus  et  diversorum  ordinum,  ut  promoveantur  tam  in 
ordinibus  quam  beneficiis  obtentis  nulliter  sub  scismate."  Then  is 
added  the  note  :  "  Obtulit  Rmus  Legatus  se  daturum  aliis  similem  dis- 
pensationem."  This  seems  to  indicate  that  the  copy  of  the  General 
Dispensation  brought  to  Rome  by  the  embassy  contained  the  puzzling 
and  defective  passage  that  appears  in  the  English  Statute.  On  ex- 
amination, the  mistake  was  presumably  set  right,  and  the  passage  as 
recited  in  the  Bull  Praeclara  carissimi  was  corrected  to  its  proper 
sense  and  wording  by  the  addition  of  the  word  concernentia. 

But  the  passage  is  cited  by  Leo  XIII,  in  the  fifth  paragraph  of  his 
Bull  Apostolicae  Curae,  without  that  crucial  word.  "  Neque  praeter- 
mittendus  est,"  says  the  Pope,  "locus  ex  eisdem  Pontificis  litteris, 
omnino  rei  congruens,  ubi  cum  aliis  beneficio  dispensationis  egen- 
tibus  numerantur  qui  tam  ordines  quam  beneficia  ecclesiastica  nulliter 
et  de  facto  obtinuerant?  Moreover,  an  argument  is  drawn  from  it 
which  depends  on  the  inaccuracy.  Paul  IV  did  not  speak  of  Orders 


JULIUS   III   AND   PAUL   IV  173 

imposed  by  the  Royal  Supremacy  (praetensa  auctori- 
tate  supremitatis  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae).  In  con- 
firming this  dispensation  the  Pope  inserted  a  some- 
what obvious  safeguard  to  the  effect  that  none  should 
be  so  received  who  had  not  been  ordained  by  a 
properly  constituted  Bishop.  "  Ita  tamen  ut  qui  ad 
ordines  tam  sacros  quam  non  sacros  ab  alio  quam 
episcopo  et  archiepiscopo  rite  et  recte  ordinato 
promoti  fuerunt  eosdem  ordines  ab  eorum  ordinario 
de  novo  suscipere  teneantur  nee  interim  in  eisdem 
ordinibus  ministrent." 

This  clause  has  been  claimed  as  excluding  all 
ordained  according  to  the  Anglican  rite.  It  is  im- 
possible to  imagine  on  what  grounds  it  is  so  in- 
terpreted. Nothing  whatever  is  said  about  the  rite 

which  had  been  obtained  nulliter,  but  of  faculties  and  dispensations 
concerning  Orders,  which  were  regarded  as  null  and  void  because 
obtained  schismatically.  There  is  not  merely  a  verbal  error  in  the 
citation  ;  the  passage  is  used  argumentatively  in  a  sense  which  it 
cannot  bear. 

This  extraordinary  mistake  was  commented  on  as  soon  as  the  Bull 
Apostolicae  curae  appeared,  and  the  criticism  called  forth  some  re- 
plies. Father  Brandi's  treatment  of  it  is  a  curiosity  of  controversy. 
In  his  commentary  on  the  Bull,  La  Condanna  delle  Ordinazioni 
Anglicane  (p.  27),  he  endeavoured,  by  means  of  the  above  mentioned 
Summarium,  to  justify  the  sense  of  the  impugned  quotation,  and  on 
the  strength  of  that  interpretation  indignantly  rebuked  those  who 
pointed  out  the  inaccuracy  of  its  wording.  A  little  below  (p.  32),  he 
quoted  the  text  of  Pole's  Dispensation,  with  the  note  :  "  Nel  testo 
della  lettera  riferita  dal  Gibson  non  si  legge  qui  la  parola  concernentia, 
quella  medesima  parola  che  .  .  .  un  Anglicano  ha  accusato  Leone 
XIII  di  aver  omessa  della  sua  Bolla."  But  Leo  XIII  was  not  quoting 
from  Pole's  Dispensation  ;  he  was  quoting  from  Praedara  carissimi, 
which  does  contain  the  word  concernentia.  The  English  Archbishops 
might  well  say  in  their  Responsio :  "  Papam  ...  ex  exemplari  minus 
perfecto  litteras  Praedara  carissimi  citare  et  ex  eo  disputare."  By 
way  of  comment  on  this  rather  obscure  hint,  Father  Brandi  mockingly 
asked  whether  the  Archbishops  had  in  their  possession  a  "better 
text"  than  that  which  the  Pope  had  used,  suggesting  its  publication 
(Roma  e  Canterbury,  p.  9).  The  "  better  text "  is  the  authentic  text 
published  by  Dom  Gasquet  in  1895. 


174     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

used  in  the  supposed  ordinations.  The  only  defect 
alluded  to  is  the  defect  of  power  on  the  part  of  the 
Bishop  or  other  person  ordaining.  Nor  is  any 
ground  for  this  defect  specified.  Neither  does  the 
Pope  assert  that  any  such  persons  actually  existed. 
He  lays  down  a  general  principle,  which  is  a  mere 
truism  of  theology. 

It  was,  however,  expressed  in  rather  unguarded 
language.  Any  who  might  have  been  ordained  ab 
alio  quam  episcopo  rite  et  recte  ordinato  were  to  be 
rejected.  But  the  phrase  rite  et  recte  is  a  very 
sweeping  one.  In  the  strict  sense,  no  Bishop  is 
rite  et  recte  ordinatus  who  has  not  been  promoted 
according  to  the  detailed  requirements  of  the  Canon 
Law.  But  according  to  the  Roman  Canon  Law, 
not  a  single  Bishop  promoted  since  the  rupture  with 
Rome  had  been  rite  et  recte  ordinatus ;  they  were 
consecrated  minus  rite.  On  this  account  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Bull  seems  to  have  engendered  grave 
doubts  and  fears  in  England.  What  Bishops  were 
rite  et  recte  ordinati? 

The  object  of  the  Brief  which  followed  was  to 
allay  these  doubts.  "Cum  sicut  nobis  nuper  innotuit 
a  pluribus  haesitetur  qui  episcopi  et  archiepiscopi 
schismate  in  ipso  regno  vigente  rite  et  recte  ordinati 
dici  possint,"  etc.  The  Brief  has  no  other  purpose, 
and  it  must  be  interpreted  accordingly.  The  Pope 
defines,  "  Eos  tantum  episcopos  et  archiepiscopos, 
qui  non  in  forma  ecclesiae  ordinati  et  consecrati 
fuerunt,  rite  et  recte  ordinatos  dici  non  posse."  All 
Bishops  consecrated  in  forma  ecclesiae  are  to  be 
taken  as  genuine  Bishops.  Again  the  Pope  does 
not  in  any  way  state,  or  even  imply,  that  there 
actually  were  any  Bishops  who  fell  short  of  this 


JULIUS   III   AND   PAUL  IV  175 

requirement.  He  is  merely  defining  the  phrase 
used  in  the  Bull.  Neither  does  he  in  any  way 
define  what  is  the  forma  ecclesiae.  Yet  this  passage 
again,  so  purely  general  in  its  application,  has  been 
alleged  as  a  further  and  more  explicit  repudiation  of 
the  Orders  conferred  by  the  Anglican  rite. 

But  we  have  not  yet  done  with  the  Brief.  We 
must  not  stretch  the  direct  purport  and  effect  of 
such  a  document  beyond  its  immediate  scope,  but 
we  may  inquire  what  is  contained  in  it  by  necessary 
implication  :  and  this,  even  if  it  be  a  mere  obiter 
dictum,  will  have  its  own  weight.  Now  the  Pope, 
in  order  to  make  his  meaning  perfectly  clear,  adds 
to  his  definition  of  a  genuine  Bishop  a  formal 
decree  that  all  clerks  whatsoever  ordained  by  such 
genuine  Bishops,  having  received  at  their  ordina- 
tion the  character  of  Order,  and  having  been  ad- 
mitted by  dispensation  to  the  execution  of  their 
Orders,  should  be  so  received  without  question. 
Any  who  were  not  ordained  by  a  genuine  Bishop,  he 
says,  must  be  re-ordained ;  "  Alios  vero  quibus 
ordines  huiusmodi  etiam  collati  fuerunt  ab  episcopis 
et  archiepiscopis  in  forma  ecclesiae  ordinatis  et  con- 
secratis  .  .  .  characterem  ordinum  eis  collatorum 
recepisse,  executione  ipsorum  ordinum  caruisse,  et 
propterea  tarn  nostram  quam  praefati  Reginaldi 
Cardinalis  et  Legati  dispensationem  eis  concessam 
eos  ad  executionem  ordinum  huiusmodi  .  .  .  plene 
habilitasse,  sicque  ab  omnibus  censeri  et  per 
quoscunque  quavis  auctoritate  fungentes  iudicari 
debere,  ac  si  secus  super  his  a  quoquam  quavis 
auctoritate  scienter  vel  ignoranter  contigerit  atten- 
tari  irritum  et  inane  decernimus." 

There    is    no    exception.      All    ordained    by    a 


176     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

genuine  Bishop  are  to  be  received.  There  is  no 
question  of  the  rite  used  in  their  ordination.  That 
is  assumed  to  be  sufficient.  But  many  of  the 
Bishops  who  were  reconciled  by  Pole,  and  who 
were  therefore  unquestionably  genuine  Bishops, 
had  for  three  years  been  ordaining  priests  and 
deacons  according  to  the  Anglican  rite.  These 
all,  having  been  ordained  by  genuine  Bishops,  are 
according  to  the  terms  of  the  Brief  to  be  received. 
Therefore  by  necessary  implication  the  Pope  ap- 
proves, or  at  least  tolerates,  the  Anglican  rite  of 
ordination.1 


II 

When  writing  the  above  Notes,  I  had  no  means  of  testing 
the  statements  made  about  the  description  of  the  Ordinal 
which  Pole  was  said  to  have  laid  before  Paul  IV.  The 
discovery  of  this  document  also  stands  to  the  credit  of 
Dom  Gasquet.  He,  or  others  working  on  his  materials, 
came  to  the  conclusion  that  it  was  forwarded  to  Rome  by 
the  hands  of  the  ambassadors,  Sir  Edward  Carne,  Lord 
Montagu,  and  Thirlby,  Bishop  of  Ely,  who  negotiated  the 
confirmation  of  Pole's  General  Dispensation  in  the  year 
1555.  It  was  inferred  that  Julius  III  commissioned  Pole 
as  Legate  upon  imperfect  information,  that  Pole  was 
doubful  about  the  extent  of  his  powers  for  dealing  with 
men  ordained  by  the  rites  of  the  new  Ordinal,  that  he 

1  So  Gasparri  concluded,  as  regards  the  ordination  of  deacons 
and  priests  only.  He  held  that  the  Pope  rejected  the  bishops  conse- 
crated by  the  new  rite.  (De  la  Valeur  des  Ordinations  Anglicanes, 
p.  15,  and  Revue  Anglo- Romaine,  Vol.  I,  p.  488).  In  the  course  of  a 
long  correspondence  that  appeared  in  the  Tablet  during  the  latter 
part  of  the  year  1895,  the  Rev.  J.  B.  Scannell  maintained,  with 
characteristic  erudition,  that  the  Pope  purposely,  and  with  true  Roman 
caution,  left  the  question  undecided.  These  letters  seem  to  have  led  to 
his  appointment  to  the  Commission  of  inquiry  in  the  following  year. 


JULIUS   III   AND  PAUL   IV  177 

consulted  the  Holy  See  accordingly,  and  that  the  newly 
elected  Paul  IV  resolved  his  doubts  after  a  careful  study 
of  the  rites  in  question.  When  I  was  in  Rome  I  had  an 
opportunity  of  examining  the  document,  with  the  valuable 
aid  of  Mr.  Bliss,  and  from  the  indications  of  its  date  I  drew 
a  different  conclusion.  The  result  was  digested  into  the 
following  note,  which  appeared  in  the  Guardian  of  June 
loth,  1896,  the  substance  of  it  being  also  included  in  the 
Supplementum : — 

CARDINAL  POLE'S   DESCRIPTION  OF  THE 
ENGLISH  ORDINAL 

Some  months  ago  a  writer  in  the  Tablet  spoke  of 
a  "full  and  minute"  description  of  the  Anglican 
rites  of  ordination  existing  in  the  archives  at  the 
Vatican.  He  supposed  this  to  have  been  sent  to 
Rome  with  the  embassy  of  1555,  and  drew  the 
conclusion  that  Paul  IV  had  it  before  him  when 
writing  the  much-discussed  Bull,  Praeclara  carissimi, 
and  in  consequence  ruled  out  the  Anglican  ordina- 
tions as  invalid.  I  do  not  propose  to  return  to  the 
vexed  question  of  the  interpretation  of  that  Bull, 
but  I  think  the  readers  of  the  Guardian  may  be 
glad  to  have  placed  before  them  the  text  of  the 
description  with  a  few  remarks  by  way  of  intro- 
duction. 

The  description  is  contained  in  a  miscellane- 
ous collection  of  papers,  bound  in  a  volume 
labelled  Nunziatura  in  Inghilterra  3,  all  of  which, 
with  the  possible  exception  of  a  copy  of  the  will  of 
Henry  VIII  in  Italian,  belong  to  the  period  of 
Pole's  Legation.  It  is  interesting  on  two  accounts  : 
first,  on  account  of  its  contents,  or  rather  of  what  is 
omitted  ;  secondly,  because  of  certain  indications  of 
its  date. 


178     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

It  is  obvious  that  the  writer  who  spoke  of  it 
as  "  full  and  minute  "  had  not  seen  it.  The  substance 
only  of  the  rite  is  avowedly  given,  all  subsidiary 
matters  being  omitted.  This  expression  must  be 
interpreted  with  some  liberality,  since  the  oaths  are 
given  in  full.  Pole  was  obviously  interested  in 
these.1  It  is  not  altogether  surprising  that  he 
thought  it  unnecessary  to  include  the  prayers,  since 
in  his  time  the  essence  of  the  rite  was  undoubtedly 
supposed  to  lie  in  the  imperative  formula ;  but  we 
seldom  come  across  so  definite  a  relegation  of  the 

o 

prayers  to  an  insignificant  position.  There  is 
another  omission  of  greater  moment.  Pole  speaks 
of  the  first  and  second  Ordinal  as  being  substantially 
the  same.  Yet  the  Porrection  of  the  Instruments, 
retained  in  the  former  book,  was  struck  out  of  the 
latter.  Pole  ignores  this  change.  It  is  difficult, 
therefore,  to  suppose  that  he  regarded  this  cere- 
mony as  the  essential  matter  of  ordination. 

The  suggestion  that  this  description  was  sent  to 
Rome  in  1555  will  not,  I  think,  bear  investigation. 
There  are  two  copies,  written  in  different  hands, 
both  Italian,  on  fine  Italian  paper.  One  bears 
as  a  watermark  the  Piccolomini  arms.  The  other 
has  a  watermark  which  I  will  describe,  as  some  one 
may  be  able  to  identify  it.  Within  a  circle  is  a 
goose,  a  Lombardic  G  within  the  circle,  and 
a  D  of  the  same  character  above  it.  Neither 
paper  has  been  folded  or  shows  any  signs  of  having 

1  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  Venetian  ambassador  in  England, 
Daniele  Barbara,  wrote  in  1550  of  the  new  rites  of  ordination  with  a 
similar  insistence  on  the  oath  :  "  Nor  do  they  differ  from  those  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  religion,  save  that  in  England  they  take  oath  to 
renounce  the  doctrine  and  authority  of  the  Pope."  {Venetian  State 
Papers,  Vol.  V,  p.  349.) 


JULIUS   III   AND   PAUL   IV  i?g 

been  sent  as  a  despatch.  The  second  copy,  page 
104,  deserves  close  attention.  It  is  written  on  a 
gathering  of  two  folio  sheets.  The  description 
begins  on  the  first  recto,  and  concludes  on  the 
second  recto.  On  the  verso  of  this  begins  another 
document  in  the  same  hand.  This  is  an  Italian 
version  of  the  proclamation  put  out  in  the  name  of 
Jane  Grey,  " Proclama  della  Regina  Janna,  figla  del 
Duca  di Suffolch"  At  the  bottom  of  the  page  the 
catch-word  is  written,  but  there  is  no  more.  The 
remaining  four  pages  of  the  paper  are  blank.  The 
proclamation  was  probably  continued  on  other 
sheets  made  up  into  the  same  gathering,  which 
are  lost. 

How  comes  this  document  here  ?  The  next 
paper  in  the  volume  is  another  copy  of  this  same 
Italian  translation  of  the  proclamation,  written  in 
an  Italian  hand  on  coarse  paper,  which  has  been 
folded  and  sealed,  and  much  soiled  in  transmission. 
From  the  fragments  of  the  seal  I  cannot  make  out 
the  device.  This  was  obviously  sent  from  Pole, 
and  a  fair  copy  was  made  for  use  in  Rome.  Since 
the  Description  of  the  Ordinations  was  copied  at 
the  same  time,  it  is  an  irresistible  conclusion  that 
this  also  was  sent  by  Pole  in  the  same  set  of 
despatches.  When  was  it  sent  ? 

A  copy  of  Jane's  proclamation  can  hardly  have 
been  sent  except  during  the  early  months  of  Mary's 
reign.  The  description  of  the  ordinations  was  sent 
at  the  same  time.1  From  this  an  important  con- 

1  I  followed  without  question  the  assumption  that  the  Description 
was  sent  to  Rome  by  Pole.  But  whence?  In  August,  1553,  he  was 
at  Maguzzano ;  towards  the  end  of  September  he  moved  to  Trent ; 
on  October  igth  he  was  at  Dillingen  ;  he  reached  Brussels  in  January ; 
he  then  visited  France,  returning  to  Flanders ;  not  until  November, 


i8o     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

elusion  will  follow.  Pole  had  received  his  Legatine 
faculties  by  Bull  from  Julius  III  in  August,  1553. 
These  were  found  insufficient,  because  they  enabled 
him  to  deal  with  such  bishops  and  clergy  only  as 
had  been  ordained  before  the  beginning  of  the 
schism.  Accordingly,  he  asked  for  extended  powers, 
which  were  given  him  by  a  Brief  dated  March  8th, 
1554.  This  Brief  contained  a  phrase  which  has 
much  puzzled  inquirers.  The  Pope  authorizes  Pole 
to  exercise  a  dispensing  and  reconciling  power  in 
the  case  of  persons  who  have  been  ordained  "non 
servata forma  ecclesiae  consueta"  It  has  often  been 
conjectured  that  these  words  may  contain  an 
allusion  to  the  Edwardine  Ordinal.1  The  con- 

1554,  did  he  land  in  England.  Let  the  following  dates  also  be  com- 
pared. On  July  2gth,  1553,  a  congregation  was  held  at  Rome  on 
receipt  of  the  news  of  Edward's  death  and  Mary's  accession  ;  on 
August  5th  Pole  was  appointed  Legate;  on  August  I5th  he  sent  a 
letter  to  Mary  by  the  hand  of  Henry  Penning,  who  was  joined  by 
Commendone  at  Brussels.  After  visiting  England  Commendone 
hastened  to  Italy,  leaving  London  on  August  23rd,  seeing  Pole  at 
Maguzzano  on  September  7th,  and  then  going  on  to  Rome.  In  conse- 
quence of  his  news,  a  Consistory  of  September  I5th  decided  that 
Pole's  Legation  should  be  delayed.  On  October  ist  Pole  wrote  to 
the  Pope  from  Trent  that  he  had  received  letters  from  Penning.  On 
October  igth  Penning  joined  him  at  Dillingen  and  was  sent  on  to 
Rome  with  detailed  instructions  to  give  "a  full  account  of  the  affairs 
of  England."  See  the  authorities  in  Dixon,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  98-111,  and 
add  the  instructions  to  Penning,  Venetian  State  Papers,  Vol.  V, 
p.  428.  It  is  evident  that  a  vast  amount  of  correspondence  preceded 
Pole's  request  for  the  fuller  powers  that  were  given  him  by  the  Brief 
of  March  8th,  1554.  On  further  consideration  it  seems  to  me  that 
the  despatch  described  above  must  have  reached  Rome  during  the 
first  weeks  of  Mary's  reign,  and  not  later  than  Commendone's  return. 
There  is  nothing  to  show  what  was  the  source  of  the  Description  of 
the  Ordinal.  It  may  have  been  composed  at  Rome  from  a  copy  of 
the  Book  received  there.  The  important  point  is  that  fair  copies  of 
the  Description,  probably  for  use  in  Consistory,  were  made  at  the 
same  time  as  copies  of  Jane's  Proclamation.  This  indicates  that  the 
Ordinal  was  under  the  notice  of  the  Pope  and  Cardinals  from  the 
early  autumn  of  1553. 

1  So  De  Augustinis.     See  Diary,  April  22nd. 


JULIUS   III   AND   PAUL   IV  181 

jecture  becomes  a  certainty  when  we  find  that 
Pole  had  already  sent  to  the  Pope  a  descrip- 
tion of  this  Ordinal,  or  of  what  he  considered 
the  essential  parts  of  it.  At  some  time  during  the 
early  months  of  Mary's  reign,  probably  when  he 
was  actually  demanding  an  extension  of  his  faculties 
enabling  him  to  deal  with  schismatical  ordinations, 
Pole  had  sent  to  Rome  a  description  of  the  Ordinal. 
The  Pope  replies  by  authorizing  him  to  recognize 
orders  which  had  been  conferred  otherwise  than  by 
the  accustomed  form  of  the  Church.  I  can  see  only 
one  possible  conclusion.  Julius  III  formally1  ap- 
proved the  English  Ordinal  in  the  form  in  which  it 
was  laid  before  him,  as  follows  : — 

FORMA  ET  RATIO  FACIENDI  ET  CONSECRANDI 

Episcopos,  Presbyteros,  et  Diaconos,  quae  cum 
prius  alio  in  libro  edita  foret,  nunc  alicubi  est  refor- 
mata  ;  cuius  substantia  hie  solum  ponitur,  et  omit- 
tuntur  preces,  psalmi,  interrogationes,  personarum 
probationes,  et  alia  quae  conveniunt. 

lusiurandum  in  Regis  Primatum  quod  ordinem 
accepturi  coram  Praelato  sedenti  in  Cathedra  iurare 
debent  antequam  legatur  Evangelium. 

Ego  N.  ex  hac  die  penitus  renuntio  reiicio, 
desero  et  relinquo  Episcopum  Romae  et  eius 
auctoritatem,  potestatem,  et  iurisdictionem :  et 
nunquam  assentiar,  aut  cum  aliquo  conveniam,  ut 
episcopus  Romae  usurpet,  exerceat  aut  habeat 
aliquod  genus  auctoritatis,  iurisdictionis  et  potesta- 
tis,  intra  hoc  Regnum,  aut  aliam  Regis  nostri 
dictionem  ;  sed  huiusmodi  rei  obstabo  omni  tem- 

1  This  word  is  much  too  strong.     I  should  have  said  "  implicitly." 


182     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

pore  et  omni  conatu,  et  de  hac  die  volens  admitto, 
approbo,  et  suscipio  Regiam  Maiestatem  solummodo 
esse  supremum  caput  in  terris  ecclesiae  Anglicanae  ; 
et  omni  consilio  et  conatu  absque  fallacia,  fraude, 
aut  alia  minus  debita  ratione  volo  observare,  custo- 
dire,  asserere,  et  defendere  omnem  vim  et  senten- 
tiam  omnium  et  singulorum  actorum  et  statutorum 
factorum,  et  faciendorum  intra  hoc  Regnum,  ad 
abrogandum,  eradicandum,  et  abolendum  episcopum 
Romae,  et  eius  auctoritatem,  et  omnium  aliorum 
actorum  et  statutorum  factorum  aut  faciendorum,  ad 
confirmandam,  et  corroborandam  Regis  potestatem, 
ut  supremi  capitis  in  terris  ecclesiae  Anglicanae. 
Et  haec  praestabo  contra  omne  genus  hominum 
cuiuscumque  status,  dignitatis,  gradus,  aut  condi- 
tionis  sint ;  et  nullo  pacto  faciam  aut  attentabo,  nee 
pro  viribus  patiar  fieri  aut  attentari,  directe  vel 
oblique,  clanculum  aut  aperte,  quicquam  ad  impedi- 
mentum,  obstaculum,  detrimentum,  abrogationem 
eius  quod  dictum  est,  aut  partis  alicuius  ex  eo  aliqua 
ratione,  colore,  aut  praetextu.  Quod  si  quod  iusiur- 
andum  fiat  aut  factum  iam  sit  per  me  alicui  homini 
ad  favendum,  conservandum,  defendendum  Episco- 
pum Romae,  aut  eius  auctoritatem,  iurisdictionem  et 
potestatem,  illud  ego  reputo  ut  vanum  et  cassum, 
ita  me  Deus  adiuvet  per  lesum  Christum. 

Episcopus  Diaconorum  capitibus  manum  im- 
ponens  singulis  dicet : 

Accipe  auctoritatem  exequendi  officium  Diaconi  in 
ecclesia  Dei  tibi  commissa,  In  nomine  Patris  et 
Filii,  et  Spiritus  Sancti,  etc. 

Postea  dans  unicuique  illorum  Novum  Testamen- 
tum,  dicet : 

Accipe     auctoritatem     legendi     Evangelium    in 


JULIUS   III   AND   PAUL   IV  183 

Ecclesia  Dei,   et  illud  praedicandi,  cum  ad  id  rite 
missus  fueris,  etc. 

Episcopus  cum  Presbyteris  praesentibus  imponet 
manus  capitibus  singulorum,  qui  genuflexi  digni- 
tatem presbyteri  accipient,  episcopo  dicente : 

Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum ;  quorum  peccata 
remittis,  remissa  sunt ;  quorum  peccata  retines, 
retenta  sunt  :  et  sis  fidelis  dispensator  verbi  Dei, 
et  suorum  sanctorum  sacramentorum.  In  nomine 
Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti,  etc. 

Deinde  Episcopus  singulis  tradens  Bibliam 
dicet : 

Accipe  auctoritatem  praedicandi  verbum  Dei,  et 
ministrandi  sacra  sacramenta  in  congregatione,  ad 
quam  eris  vocatus. 

Archiepiscopus  petet  Regis  mandatum  ad  episco- 
pum  inaugurandum,  et  iusiurandum  pro  Regis 
primatu  exigitur  ut  a  Diacono  et  Presbytero  ;  sed 
Episcopus  insuper  iurabit  obedientiam  Archiepis- 
copo  his  verbis : 

In  Nomine  Domini,  Amen.  Ego  N.  Electus 
episcopus  Ecclesiae  N.  profiteer  et  polliceor  omnem 
debitam  reverentiam,  et  obedientiam  Archiepiscopo, 
et  Metropolitanae  ecclesiae  N.  et  eius  successoribus. 
Ita  me  Deus  adiuvet  per  lesum  Christum. 

Sed  cum  ordinabitur  ipse  Archiepiscopus,  cum 
omnia  alia  fiant  quemadmodum  pro  episcopo,  hoc 
iusiurandum  omittitur. 

Archiepiscopi  sedentis  verba  : 

Prater,  quoniam  Sancta  Scriptura,  et  veteres 
Canones  iubent,  ne  cui  cito  manus  imponamus 
aut  admittamus  ad  gubernandam  congregationem 
Christi,  qui  earn  sibi  redemit  non  minori  pretio 
quam  effusionis  sanguinis  sui,  antequam  te  admittam 


184     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

ad  hanc  administrationem  ad  quam  vocaris,  ex  te 
quaeram  plerosque  articulos,  ut  praesens  congre- 
gatio  habeat  experimentum,  et  ferat  testimonium, 
quo  animo  sis  praeditus,  ut  te  geras  in  Ecclesia  Dei 
— sequuntur  in  libro  interrogata,  quae  omittimus. 

Archiepiscopus  Episcopique  praesentes  manus  im- 
ponunt  capiti  electi  episcopi,  Archiepiscopo  dicente: 

Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,  et  memineris  ut  ex- 
cites gratiam  Dei,  quae  est  in  te  per  manuum 
impositionem,  non  enim  dedit  nobis  Deus  spiritum 
timiditatis,  sed  potentiae,  dilectionis,  et  sobrietatis. 

Tune  Archiepiscopus  dabit  illi  Bibliam,  dicens  : 

Attende  lectioni,  exhortationi,  doctrinae,  ac  medi- 
tare  quae  in  hoc  libro  scripta  sunt,  ut  tuus  profectus, 
qui  inde  erit,  manifestus  sit  omnibus  hominibus. 
Attende  tibi  ipsi  et  doctrinae  :  persiste  in  his,  nam 
si  id  feceris  te  ipsum  servabis,  et  eos  qui  te  audie- 
rint.  Sis  gregis  Christi  Pastor,  non  lupus ;  pasce 
ilium,  ne  devores :  sustine  infirmos,  sana  aegrotos, 
colliga  confractos,  reduc  eiectos,  quaere  perditos. 
Ita  sis  misericors,  ut  ne  sis  nimis ;  sic  disciplinam 
exigas,  ut  non  obliviscaris  misericordiam  :  ut  cum 
summus  Pastor  venerit,  accipias  incorruptibilem 
coronam  gloriae  per  lesum  Christum  Dominum 
Nostrum.  Amen. 


THE   COUNCIL  OF   MAINZ, 
A.D.    1549 


VII 


THE  COUNCIL  OF  MAINZ, 
A.D.   i 549 

Dissertationis  Apologeticae  De  Hierarchia  Anglicana 
Supplementum  ;  Appendix  71 

CONCILIUM  Provinciale  Moguntiae  habitum 
est  mense  Maio  1549,  praesidente  archiepis- 
copo  Sebastiano  von  Heussenstamm.  Acta  Concilii 
mense  Septembri  eiusdem  anni  Moguntiae  vulgata 
sunt,  quibus  accessit  Institutio  ad  Pietatem  Ckris- 
tianam  in  Concilio  Provinciali  promissa.  Librum 
habet  Bibliotheca  Casanatensis. 

In  Concilio  promulgata  est  Metkodus  de  Doctrina 
Christiana,  quae  sequentia  habet. 

CAP.  XXXV,  De  Sacramento  Ordinis 
Fol.  IX  a 

In  collatione  Ordinum,  quae  cum  impositione 
manuum  velut  visibili  signo  traditur,  doceant  rite 
ordinatis  gratiam  divinitus  conferri  qua  ad  ecclesias- 
tica  munera  rite  et  utiliter  exercenda  apti  et  idonei 
efficiantur,  et  qua  rata  sint  et  efficacia,  quae  a  rite 
ordinatis  in  Ecclesia  iuxta  Christi  et  Ecclesiae  in- 
stitutionem  geruntur  etc. 

1  See  Diary,  April  22nd,  May  ist. 
187 


i88     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


EXCERPTA  EX  Institution*  ad  Pietatem 

CAP.  De  Forma  Sacramenti  Ordinis 
Fol.  CCXXII  b 

***** 

Episcopus  igitur  in  conferendis  Ordinibus,  ad 
supradictas  Domini  promissiones  et  mandata  attente 
respiciens,  tali  verborum  forma  utitur,  quae  ad  pro- 
missiones huiusmodi  et  mandata  quam  proxime 
accedit,  eaque  proprie  et  diserte  exprimit.  Tradi- 
turus  enim  Ordinem  Sacerdotalem,  Accipe,  inquit, 
Spiritum  Sanctum,  quorum  remiseris  peccata,  remit- 
tuntur  eis,  et  quorum  retinueris,  retenta  sunt.1 
Similiter  in  aliorum  omnium  Ordinum  collatione  ex 
ipso  Ordinationis  ritu  per  instrument!  traditionem, 
et  verborum  certam  formam,  functionem  unicuique 
Ordini  ex  Christi  et  Ecclesiae  institutione  competen- 
tem  clare  exprimit. 

CAP.  De  Materia  seu  Elemento  Sacramenti 

Ordinis 
Foil.  CCXXIII-IV 

In  Ordinibus  maioribus,  Diaconatu  et  Presbyterio, 
internae  virtutis  et  gratiae  accipiendae  externum 
signum  et  sensibile  elementum  adhibetur  manuum 
impositio,  quam  ex  Apostolica  traditione  descendere 
diserte  Lucas  in  Actis  Apostolicis  testatur  cap.  6, 
13,  14.  Ad  hunc  autem  externum  manuum  imposi- 
tionis  ritum,  in  verbo  Dei  et  orationibus  exhibitum, 

1   Vide  infra  Cap.  de  Presbyteris. 


THE  COUNCIL   OF   MAINZ,   A.D.    1549          189 

internam  et  spiritalem  gratiam  consequi,  quae  in 
ministerio  ordinati  efficaciter  operetur,  et  ad  suscepti 
muneris  executionem  reddat  idoneum,  aperte  Paulus 
indicat.  Noli,  inquiens,  negligere  gratiam,  quae  data 
est  tibi  per  prophetiam  cum  impositione  manuum 
Presbyterii ;  et,  Ut  resuscites  gratiam  Dei  quae  in  te 
est  per  impositionem  manuum  mearum. 

Designat  autem  impositio  manuum  in  ordinando 
operum  Sancti  Spiritus  resuscitationem,  siquidem  in 
digitis  diversa  Spiritus  Sancti  dona  indicantur : 
manus  autem  operationem  significant.  Unde  in- 
nuitur,  ordinatum  diversis  Spiritus  Sancti  donis 
impleri,  quae  eum  ad  diversas  Ecclesiastici  muneris 
functiones  rite  et  utiliter  obeundas  efficacem  et 
idoneum  reddant. 

Ambrosius  mysterium  impositionis  manuum  sic 
explicat.  Manus  impositiones  verba  sunt  mystica, 
quibus  confirmatur  ad  opus  electus,  accipiens  potes- 
tatem,  teste  conscientia  sua,  ut  audeat  vice  Domini 
sacrificium  offerre  Deo.  Et  idem,  Homo  imponit 
manus :  Deus  largitur  gratiam.  Sacerdos  imponit 
supplicem  dexteram,  et  Deus  benedicit  potenti  dex- 
tera.  Episcopus  initiat  Ordinem,  et  Deus  tribuat 
dignitatem. 

Itaque  sicut  in  Baptismo  aquae  infusio  ritus  est 
divinitus  approbatus,  aptam  significationem  habens, 
ad  certificandam  baptizati  conscientiam  de  interna 
animae  purgatione,  et  ablutione  omnium  sordium 
spiritualium,  ita  in  Ordinis  Sacramento  manuum 
impositio  ritus  est,  in  scripturis  approbatus,  aptam 
significationem  habens  ad  certificandam  ordinati  con- 
scientiam de  dono  Dei,  ad  aedificationem  Ecclesiae 
pro  utili  et  efficaci  muneris  in  Ecclesia  gerendi 
executione  sibi  collate. 


igo     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Ad  initiationem  Sacerdotum,  praeter  impositionem 
manuum,  etiam  Unctio  adhiberi  solet :  cuius  usus  et 
propter  vetustatem  suam,  et  propter  mysterium 
aptamque  significationem,  omnino  in  Ecclesia  re- 
tinendus  est.  Ritus  erat  legis  veteris,  ut  in  eo  populo, 
ex  quo  Christus  erat  nasciturus,  Reges  et  Sacerdotes 
oleo  unguerentur.  Hanc  unctionem  Christiana  Re- 
ligio  (cum  caeteras  legis  istius  antiquae  caeremonias, 
quae  futurorum  significationem  continebant,  super- 
veniente  veritate  reliquerit)  propter  mysterium  re- 
tinuit,  multiplicemque  in  novo  populo  Unctionem 
exercet.  Unguuntur  singuli  confessionem  Christiani 
nominis  in  mysterio  Baptismi  suscipientes,  ut  que- 
madmodum  Christus  ab  unctione  nomen  habet,  eo 
quod  unxerit  eum  Deus  prae  participibus  suis  :  sic 
ipsi  quoque  accepta  unctione  esse  uncti  Dei, 
Christique  nominis  participes  fieri,  et  eius  in  se 
gratiam  habere  possint.  Unguuntur  inchoaturi  vitam 
Christianam,  quasi  athletae  Domini,  cuius  bella 
adversus  Diaboli  phalanges  et  seculi  huius  insidias 
pugnaturi  sunt.  Unguuntur  in  progressu  vitae  ad 
robur  et  confirmationem,  ut  omnis  divinae  virtutis 
et  gratiae  perfectionem  et  complementum  accipiant. 
Unguuntur  in  exitu  vitae,  ut  tune  ex  infirmitate 
aeger  animus  fiducia  et  consolatione  erigatur,  ne 
bravium  illud,  quod  in  vitae  cursu  tenuerunt,  in  fine 
amittant,  et  ne  fructu  fidei  suae,  animarum  salute, 
despolientur. 

Praeter  has  unctiones  Christianis  omnibus  com- 
munes, singulari  quadam  unctione  initiat  Sacerdotes 
suos  Catholica  Ecclesia,  in  signum  sacrationis  et 
excellentis  potestatis,  quam  eis  ad  solvenda  ligandave 
peccata  hominum  Christus  tradidit,  ut  sint  reges 
et  rectores  in  populo  Dei  ad  aedificationem  EC- 


THE  COUNCIL  OF   MAINZ,   A.D.  1549          191 

clesiae,  et  ut  ex  unctione  admoneantur  se  gratiam 
consecrandi  accepisse,  et  charitatis  opera  debere 
extendere  ad  omnes.  Huius  autem  sacerdotalis 
unctionis  usum  non  Romana  solum  sed  Graeca 
etiam  Ecclesia  ab  ipsis  Apostolorum  temporibus 
tenuit,  cuius  meminit  Theophylactus.  Omnis  (inquit) 
cuicumque  concredita  est  praesidentia,  etiam  si 
indignus  fuerit,  donum  habet  ex  unctione,  id  quod 
magnum  divinae  misericordiae  est  sacramentum. 

In  reliquis  Ordinibus  pro  elemento  sunt  instru- 
menta  quae  pro  Ordinis  varietate  Episcopus  singulis 
porrigens,  simul  admonet  eos,  ut  in  suscepto  munere 
rite  et  diligenter  ministrare  sollicite  curent.  Ex 
ipso  autem  instrumento  quodammodo  ordinandus 
intelligit  quae  sint  futurae  suscepti  Ordinis  partes  et 
officia. 

Oratio  autem  in  singulis  Ordinibus  recitatur  ab 
Ordinatore,  qua  officia  eius  Ordinis  commemorat  et 
simul  Deum  rogat  ut  in  obeundis  officiis  ad  aedifica- 
tionem  Ecclesiae  suae  ordinatis  per  gratiam  suam 
benignus  et  efficax  assistere  dignetur. 

Tondentur  etiam  ordinandi,  quem  ritum  ab 
Apostolis  introductum  Rabanus  commemorat,  ut 
tons!  formam  et  similitudinem  Christi  spinis  coronati 
in  capite  prae  se  ferrent,  et  simul  per  tonsuram  a 
plebe  discernerentur.  Similiter  per  tonsuram  sicut 
per  unctionem  regalis  dignitas  in  Sacerdotibus 
designatur.  Nudatum  etiam  a  suprema  parte  caput 
innuit  ministros  Ecclesiae  a  se  abiicere  debere 
quaecunque  animum  ad  divina  se  erigentem  depri- 
mere  et  impedire  solent. 


192     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

CAP.  De  Presbyteris. 

Fol.  CCXXX  b. 
*  *  *  *  * 

Horum  officiorum  Episcopus  inordinatione  futures 
sacerdotes  verbis  admonet.  Oui  ordinandi  estis 
Presbyter!  (inquiens)  offerre  vos  oportet,  baptizare, 
praedicare,  et  bonis  operibus  ac  Deo  placitis  undique 
redundare.  Et  insuper  variis  ritibus  adhibitis, 
traditisque  diversis  instrumentis,  quae  sint  eorum 
munera  insinuat. 

Principio  enim  manus  capitibus  eorum  imponens, 
gratiam  absolutionis,  et  potestatem  remittendi  ac 
retinendi  peccata  eis  impertitur.  Quorum  remiseris 
peccata  (inquit)  remittuntur  eis.1  Deinde  stolam 
utrique  humero  aptans,  super  pectore  in  modum 
crucis  extendit ;  innuens  eos  suavi  iugo  Domini 
submitti  debere,  et  contra  omnes  mundi  casus  corda 
praemunire,  ne  aut  prosperis  extollantur,  aut  in 
adversis  animum  despondentes  concidant.  Et  casula 
eos  convestiens  admonet  ut  caritatem  exerceant  in 
omnes.  Post  haec  manus  eorum  inungit,  ut  intelli- 
gant  sibi  concessam  esse  gratiam  consecrandi.  De- 
mum  calicem  et  patenam  hostia  superposita  offerens, 
potestatem  tradit  offerendi  Deo  hostiam  sanctam  et 
placabilem  pro  totius  Ecclesiae  incolumitate. 

1  Supra,  p.  1 88.  De  his  in  Supplement,  p.  22,  ita  disputavi. 
"  Notatu  dignum  est  Concilium  non  modo  impositionem  manuum  pro 
materia  sacramentali  posuisse,  sed  etiam  formam  constituisse  in 
verbis  :  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,  quorum  remiseris  peccata  etc., 
quae  verba  non  ut  in  Pontifical!  Romano  in  fine  Missae  sz&  principio, 
id  est,  ni  fallor,  in  principio  ordinationis  dicta  fuisse  assertum  est. 
(Cap.  de  Presbyteris].  Utrimque  videtur  eadem  dispositio  ac  in  ritu 
Anglicano.  Id  melius  exponere  potuissem  si  Pontificale  eis  temporibus 
Moguntiae  usurpatum  sub  oculis  habuissem,  sed  ne  Palatina  quidem 
Bibliotheca  exemplar  continet.  Quaestio  deliberatu  digna  est  utrum 
auctores  ritus  Anglicani  aliquid  ex  libris  Moguntinis  mutuaverint,  an 
mera  sit  coincidentia  temporis." 


THE   PAMPHLET   "  DE   RE 
ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS   CRITICS 


VIII 

THE  PAMPHLET  "DE  RE 
ANGLICANA"  AND  ITS  CRITICS 

i 

DE  RE  ANGLICANA^ 

"PCCLESIAM  Anglicanam  inde  a  saeculo  XVI 
J— -/  duo  opinionum  influxus  agitant,  alter  in 
doctrinam  Sacramentalem  intendens,  quern  Catholi- 
cum  vocare  liceat,  alter  e  fonte  Puritano  manans. 
Reformatio  sub  Henrico  VIII  incepta  nihil  contra 
fidem  Catholicam  effecit.  Quaedam,  fateor,  facino- 
rosa,  quaedam  adhuc  ploranda  evenerunt ;  a  com- 
munione  Ecclesiae  Romanae  recessum  est,  vita 
religiosa  extirpata  ;  in  his  autem  quae  ad  doctrinam 
spectant,  nihil  mutatum.  Nee  tamen  etiam  tune 
deerant  qui  novas  res  in  hac  parte  molirentur,  inter 
quos  et  episcopi  rari  erant,  quorum  princeps  Cran- 
mer.  Hi  igitur,  mortuo  Henrico,  cum  parvulus 
Eduardus  partium  suarum  asseclis  in  tutelam  traditus 
esset,civili  potestate  innixi  multa  turn  circa  doctrinam 
turn  in  cultu  divino  innovabant  Opinionibus  enim 
Zuinglianis  aliquatenus  infecti  extraneos  haereticos, 
qui  eas  disseminarent,  Petrum  Martyrem,  Bucerum, 
aliosque  in  Angliam  vocarunt,  quorum  et  fautores 
ac  discipulos  in  Ecclesia  promovebant.  Attamen 

1  See  Diary,  May  5th. 
195 


196     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

episcopi,  qui  animo  et  sententia  Catholici  erant, 
sedes  suas  retinuerunt,  novisque  rebus  quantum 
possent  sese  accommodarunt.  Nonnulli  autem  ex 
his  detrusi  sunt,  nee  dubium  est  partes  novatorum 
in  reformationem  ulteriorem  atque  exitiabilem  pro- 
gressuras  fuisse,  nisi  prae  morte  Eduardi  immatura 
tanta  consilia  subito  collapsa  essent. 

Maria  igitur  regnum  excipiente  nonnulli  episcopi 
destituti  sunt,  inter  quos  Cranmer  ;  ceteri  manebant. 
Multi  etiam,  qui  novis  rebus  faverant,  omnia  ad 
nutum  reginae  facere  properabant.  Quae  mutata 
erant,  ad  normam  antiquam  reducta  sunt ;  in  com- 
munionem  Ecclesiae  Romanae  reditum  est.  Totus 
fere  clerus  se  submisit ;  pauci  admodum  e  patria 
transfugerunt,  nonnulli  tarn  clerici  quam  laici  poenis 
haereseos  afflicti  sunt ;  ceteri  opiniones  suas  silentio 
comprimebant. 

Mortuapost  quinque  annos  Maria,  regnum  Eliza- 
betha  excepit.  Consiliarios  qui  sub  Maria  rempub- 
licam  direxerant  plerumque  retinuit ;  attamen  res 
novas  cautius  movebat.  Peste  inoravescente  archi- 

O 

episcopus  Cantuariensis  multique  episcopi  mortui 
sunt.  In  sedem  Cantuariensem  suffectus  est 
Matthaeus  Parker,  qui  Maria  regnante  vitam  pri- 
vatam  degerat,  vir  prudens  atque  ab  omni  violentia 
aversus.  Cultus  ac  religionis  facies  quae  tempore 
Eduardi  erat,  quibusdam  in  sensum  magis  ca- 
tholicum  mutatis,  reducta  est.  Episcopi  fere  omnes, 
cum  haec  fieri  nollent,  civili  potestate  destituti  sunt, 
qui  tamen  partes  suas  nequaquam  ad  resistendum 
moverunt.  Pauci  e  clero  novis  rebus  sese  accom- 
modare  recusarunt,  plerique  spe  fortasse  meliorum 
quieti  manebant.  Universa  Ecclesia  Anglicana 
eisdem  legibus  eodem  cultu  constanter  utebatur. 


"DE   RE  ANGLICAN  A"  AND   ITS   CRITICS     197 

Certe  post  aliquot  annos,  cum  Pius  V  per  Bullam 
Regnans  in  Excelsis  Elizabethan!  eiusque  fau tores  ex- 
communicasset,  ei  qui  auctoritati  Pontificiae  maxime 
faverent  ab  hac  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae  unitate  reces- 
serunt.  De  quibus  nihil  amplius  dicam  :  ipsius  Ec- 
clesiae Anglicanae  fortunam  ac  statum  describe. 

Primis  igitur  Elizabethae  annis  exules,  qui  Maria 
regnante  transfugerant,  ab  Helvetia  vel  Germania 
opinionibus  Calvinianis  vel  amplius  imbuti  redierunt. 
Ex  his  partes  Puritanae  originem  habuerunt. 
Exinde  magna  erat  intra  Ecclesiam  Anglicanam 
controversia,  quae  usque  hodie  aliquo  modo  sub- 
sistit.  Universi  enim  eisdem  ritibus  usi,  eisdem 
fidei  doctrinis  adstricti,  de  caerimoniis,  de  regimine 
pastorali,  de  potestatis  clavium  exercitio,  denique 
de  gratiae  doctrinis  acriter  disputabant.  Partes 
Puritanae,  partes  quas  Catholicas  vocamus,  non 
alio  modo  in  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae  unitate  sese 
tenebant,  quam  olim  in  regno  Francico  consistebant 
partes  ultramontanae  et  gallicanae.  Diu  atque 
incerto  eventu  dimicabatur,  donee  anno  1662,  post 
bellum  scilicet  intestinum  pace  instaurata,  acriores 
ex  Puritanis  tandem  expulsi  sunt.  Ex  his  pro- 
veniunt  Dissidentes,  qui  extra  ecclesiam  conventibus 
constitutis  disciplinam  Calvinianam  adhuc  professi 
in  indifferentismum  plerique  abierunt. 

At  in  Ecclesia  Anglicana  partes  Puritanae,  quam- 
vis  attenuatae  atque  in  dies  a  primordiis  suis 
Calvinianis  magis  remotae,  perstiterunt.  Ecclesia 
autem  partium  Catholicarum  consiliis  gubernata 
plurimos  annos  magna  cum  eruditionis  laude  floruit. 
Quis  enim  Beveregium  non  novit  ?  Qui  tamen  in 
clero  Anglico  vix  primam  palmam  reportavit.  Sed 
neque  minore  pietatis  quam  eruditionis  honore  stetit 


198     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

res  nostra.  Ecclesia  Anglicana  e  tot  periculis  elapsa 
ab  aliis  ecclesiis  nationalibus  in  imitate  catholica 
comprehensis  nihil  distulit  nisi  quod  communione 
sacrorum  cum  Sancta  Sede  careret.  Nee  tamen 
insularitate  sua  nimium  gaudebant  nostri,  sed  cum 
aliis  Ecclesiis  turn  commercium  litterarum  insti- 
tuerunt,  turn  unionem  perfectiorem  ambierunt. 
Saeculo  octavo  decimo  ineunte  quaedam  in  hac 
parte  conabantur  quae  prospero  eventu  consequi 
potuissent  nisi  exteris  compagibus  impediti  fuissent. 

Isto  enim  saeculo  Ecclesia  Anglicana  eadem 
subiit  quae  reliquam  Christianitatem  affligebant. 
Zelum  evanuit,  caritas  frigescebat,  vita  et  mores 
clericorum  relictis  flagrantibus  vitiis  ad  saecularem 
normam  redigebantur  ;  et  quod  aliis  malis  fonti  et 
origini  fuit,  ecclesia  civili  potestati  magis  in  dies  subi- 
gebatur.  Quae  cum  paene  intolerabilia  fierent,  subito 
post  annum  1830  divina  providentia  surgebant  aliqui, 
sacerdotes  plerumque  in  Academia  Oxoniensi  de- 
morantes,  qui  ad  nova  certamina  fideles  evocarent. 
Principio  autem  vitae  sanctimoniam  clero  inculca- 
bant,  ad  poenitentiam  agendam,  ad  munera  diligen- 
tius  obeunda  impellebant.  Deinde  ad  externum 
Ecclesiae  statum  versi  iugum  civilis  potestatis  aut 
excutiendum  aut  certe  sublevandum  docuerunt, 
sacras  Synodos  et  salutares  disciplinae  regulas  resus- 
citandas  vindicabant.  Postremo  ad  dogmata  specta- 
bant,  sanctorum  patrum  scripta  diligentissime  ex- 
coluerunt  atque  Anglice  vulganda  curaverunt,  quibus 
novae  atque  haereticae  opiniones,  e  scholis  Calvin- 
ianis  plerumque  derivatae,  penitus  expellerentur. 

Eodem  fere  tempore  in  Academia  Cantabrigiensi 
quaestiones  de  cultu  divino  renovando  pari  studio 
agitatae  sunt.  De  architectura,  de  musica  eccle- 


"DE   RE  ANGLICAN  A"  AND   ITS  CRITICS     199 

siastica,  de  ornamentis,  de  rubrica  observanda  res 
erat.  In  primis  autem  de  missae  sollemniis  fre- 
quentius  celebrandis  sollicite  deliberatum  est.  Fervor 
incredibilis  totam  ecclesiam  invasit.  Tractariani, 
quos  ex  usu  tractatuum  popularium  praecipuos 
Oxonienses  vocabant,  sensum  Catholicum,  qui 
diutius  frigebat,  excitarunt.  Tandem  cum  Ecclesiam 
Anglicanam  insular!  libertate  potius  impeditam 
quam  defensam  esse  perciperent,  ad  alias  ecclesias 
magno  cum  unitatis  desiderio  versi  causas  et  funda- 
menta  schismatis  investigare  inceperunt.  Quocirca 
decreta  ac  definitiones  Concilii  Tridentini  summo 
studio  tractabant,  ut  cum  eis  formulas  ac  definitiones 
Anglicanas  non  adeo  dissonas  esse  monstrarent  ut 
ineluctabilis  inde  dissensio  eveniret. 

Ceterum  partes  Puritanae  his  rebus  perterritae 
contra  motum  catholicum  strenue  reluctabantur,  et 
talibus  adversariis  ipsae  impares  cum  civilis  potes- 
tatis  fautoribus  socia  arma  iunxerunt.  Episcopi  non 
pauci  his  vires  et  nomen  addiderunt,  ceteri  timidi  et 
principibus  civitatis  ex  longo  usu  addicti,  necnon 
saecularibus  curis  impediti,  veritatem  et  veritatis 
defensores  minime  adiuvarunt ;  vix  unus  inter 
vindices  apostolicae  traditionis  exstitit.  Ergo 
nonnulli,  de  re  Anglicana  prorsus  desperantes, 
relictis  armis  in  pacem  Ecclesiae  Romanae  trans- 
fugerunt ;  alii  a  fide  defecerunt.  Nee  tamen  qui 
restabant  a  conatu  destiterunt,  Keble,  Pusey,  du- 
centi  alii,  quamvis  defectu  amicorum  graviter  afflicti, 
Ecclesiae  renovandae  causam  spe  invicta  sustine- 
bant.  Nee  spes  fefellit.  Si  quis  Ecclesiam  Angli- 
canam, qualis  nunc  exstat,  lustraverit,  eorum 
labores  videbit.  Quod  impossibile  videbatur,  id 
auxiliante  divina  gratia  efficere  statuerunt.  Haud 


200     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

ignari  malorum  ex  ipsa  humilitate  fiduciam  con- 
ceperunt :  Laetati  sumus  pro  diebus,  quibus  nos 
humiliasti ;  annis  quibus  vidimus  mala.  Respice 
in  servos  titos,  et  in  opera  tua  :  et  dirige  folios  eorum. 
Et  sit  splendor  Domini  Dei  nostri  super  nos,  ct 
opera  mammm  nostrarum  dirige  super  nos. 

Tota  enim  facies  Ecclesiae  his  quinquaginta  annis 
renovata  est.  Doctrina  Catholica  ubique  praedi- 
catur.  De  praeceptis  Novae  Legis,  de  auxiliis 
gratiae,  de  usu  Sacramentorum  populus  instruitur. 
Pro  frigidis  ac  ieiunis  ingenii  Calvinistici  institu- 
tionibus  condones  fide  et  caritate  plenae  audiuntur. 
De  sanctorum  mentis,  de  consiliis  perfectionis  non 
amplius  siletur.  Ubi  rarius  Eucharistia  olim  cele- 
brabatur,  nunc  iugiter  sacrificium  offertur ;  ubi 
pauci  Mensam  Domini  adibant,  nunc  frequens 
populus  digna  cum  adoratione  de  cibo  caelesti  parti- 
cipat.  Munera  pastoralia  sacerdotes  nunc  aliter 
praestant,  nee  facile  invenitur  qui  adeo  negligat : 
nee  modo  ex  paucorum  zelo  id  pendet,  sed  ex  sen- 
tentia  etiam  saecularium  parochus  ad  meliora 
sequenda  obligatur.  Multa  quae  adversae  partes 
induxerant,  aut  penitus  evanuerunt,  aut  in  novos 
usus  conversa  manent ;  scholas  dominicales,  hymnos 
populares  a  Puritanis  in  sensum  Catholicum  repor- 
tavimus.  Multa  quoque  ex  aliis  ecclesiis  grati 
mutuavimus,  secessus  seu  exercitia  spiritualia  tam 
pro  clero  quam  pro  laicis,  missiones  in  civitatibus 
et  in  pagis,  stationes  quadragesimales,  hoc  genus 
omne,  iam  nobis  propria  sunt.  Officium  Divinum 
pro  usu  nostro,  semel  tantum  in  mense  recitato 
Psalterio,  levius  est  onus,  sed  in  pluribus  dioecesibus 
totum  Psalterium,  sacerdotibus  aliis  alios  psalmos  leg- 
entibus,  ex  constitutione  episcopi  quotidie  recitatur. 


"DE  RE   ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS  CRITICS     201 

Ad  alia  pergamus.  Statum  religiosum  qui  usque 
a  saeculo  sexto  decimo  penitus  obsoleverat  anni 
recentes  nova  cum  devotione  reduxerunt.  Societas 
S.  loannis  Evangelistae,  anno  1866  fundata,  cui 
domus  materna  apud  Cowley  in  agro  Oxoniensi  sita 
est,  grandem  ecclesiam  conventualem  nuperrime 
extruxit ;  domus  quoque  in  India,  in  Africa  Meri- 
dionali,  in  America  nunc  habet.  Monialium  inclu- 
sarum  nonnulli  conventus  erecti  sunt ;  religiosarum 
votis  paupertatis  castitatis  et  obedientiae  adstric- 
tarum,  quae  in  variis  caritatis  operibus  vitam  degunt, 
tanta  est  multitudo,  ut  iam  plures  religioni  devotae 
sint  quam  quae  tempore  reformationis  in  Anglia 
exstarent.  Plures  insuper  societates  sacerdotum 
saecularium  vitam  communem  degentium  ab  epis- 
copis  dioecesanis  fundatae  sunt,  qui  plerumque  in 
Missionibus  versantur.1 

Haec  sunt  indicia  renovatae  Ecclesiae.  Non 
omnia  quidem  ex  sententia  fieri  dico.  Nemo 
prudens  negat  multa  restare  quae  reformatione 
egeant,  multa  quae  pro  pudore  sileantur ;  nee  quae 
iam  facta  vidit,  aliud  esse  quam  faciendorum  arrha- 
bonem  prae  se  fert.  Ita  tamen  de  his  gaudere 
nobis  liceat.  In  hunc  statum  non  sine  multo  labore 
pervenimus.  Fructus  videmus,  labores  vix  in 
memoria  retinemus.  Attamen  memoria  digni  sunt ; 
siquidem  de  praeteritis  cogitanti  magna  futurarum 
rerum  fiducia  erit.  Cum  duobus  hostibus  dimicatum 
est ;  cum  civili  potestate  quae  Ecclesiam  in  vinculis 
comprimere  voluit,  cum  partibus  Puritanis  quae 
renovationi  Catholicae  strenuissime  se  opponebant. 
Partes  Puritanae  victae  sunt,  nee  tamen  evanuerunt. 
Adhuc  restant,  sed  neque  aequa  potentia  nee  eadem 

1  Vide  Appendicem. 


202     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

voluntas.  Episcopi  quatuor  vel  quinque  eo  intend- 
unt,  ceteri  sententia  Catholici  sunt.  Contra  ex- 
cessus  potestatis  civilis  dimicantes  veram  potius 
quam  speciosam  victoriam  ita  rettulimus,  ut  libertate 
maiore  quam  quae  appareat  utamur.  Anno  1856 
tandem  effectum  est  ut  Synodi  Provinciales,  quibus 
annos  plus  centum  silentium  impositum  esset, 
sessiones  haberent.  Definitiones  de  fide  et  doctrina, 
quas  Concilium  Regium  proponere  ausum  est,  primo 
quidem  aliquorum  animos  perturbabant,  nunc  prae 
contemptu  negliguntur.  Cum  autem  potestas  civilis 
rebus  ad  cultum  spectantibus  se  ingerere  conaretur, 
totis  viribus  aperte  resistebatur.  De  rubrica  sensu 
Catholico  observanda  quaestio  erat.  Id  praecipue 
metuentes  partes  Puritanae,  cum  res  suas  in  dies 
collabi  sentirent,  ad  iudicia  recurrebant,  et  cum 
curiae  ecclesiasticae  sensum  Catholicum  defendis- 
sent,  Concilium  Regium  appellabant.  Huius  iudicio 
sensus  Catholicus  condemnatus  est ;  cui  cum  maior 
pars  cleri  obtemperare  recusasset,  nova  lege  in  Par- 
liamento  facta  (anno  1874)  Ritualistas,  quos  voca- 
bant,  principes  civitatis  aggressi  sunt.  Inde  magnus 
tumultus  oritur.  Nonnulli  sacerdotes  ab  ecclesiis 
eiecti,  quinque,  quibus  nomina  Tooth,  Dale, 
Enraght,  Green,  Bell-Cox,  in  carcere  donee  se 
submitterent  detenti  sunt ;  quibus  omnibus  aut  per 
errorem  iudicii  aut  lapsu  temporis  nulla  facta  sub- 
missione  liberatis,  tandem  ab  his  tumultibus  ecclesia 
quievit ;  nunc  vix  credibile  videtur  talia  esse  facta. 
Processu  contra  Episcopum  Lincolniensem  de  eisdem 
rebus  instituto,  Archiepiscopus  Cantuariensis,  edictis 
civilium  tribunalium  neglectis,  rem  propria  sua  aucto- 
ritate  in  sensu  Catholico  determinavit.  (Anno  1890). 
Cum  igitur  domi  res  ita  se  habeant,  externis 


"DE   RE  ANGLICANA"  AND  ITS  CRITICS     203 

iam  magis  vacamus,  et  de  imitate  cum  aliis 
Ecclesiis  renovanda  arrectis  animis  deliberatur. 
Sunt  qui  ad  Graecos  et  Russos  praecipue  con- 
vertantur.  Cum  Patriarcha  Hierosolymitano,  cum 
Metropolita  Kievensi,  denique  cum  sancta  Russorum 
Synodo,  Archiepiscopus  Cantuariensis  fratern- 
um  litterarum  et  legationum  commercium  instituit. 
Multi  in  sanctam  Ecclesiam  Romanam,  tanquam 
matrem  unde  nobis  lumen  Evangelii  primum  re- 
fulsit,  oculos  magno  cum  desiderio  intendunt. 
Nuperrime  in  Congressu  Ecclesiastico  Norwici 
habito  Archiepiscopus  Eboracensis  de  impedimentis 
unitatis  ex  nostra  parte  amovendis  magna  cum 
bonorum  laude  concionatus  est.  Illustrissimus 
noster  vicecomes  de  Halifax,  qui  eadem  strenuis- 
sime  pro  laicali  statu  movet,  in  eodem  Congressu 
omnibus  fere  plaudentibus  orationem  de  unitate 
instauranda  habuit.  Quem  multi  alii  secuti  sunt. 
Nee  mirum.  Nam  quo  magis  in  nostram  Catholici 
cultus  et  doctrinae  haereditatem  intramus,  eo 
ardentius  in  perfectam  cum  aliis  Catholicis  unitatem 
et  communionem  anhelamus. 

Non  quidem  novus  est  atque  inauditus  ille  animi 
motus.  Namque  inde  a  principio  dissensionis  quae 
saeculo  sexto  decimo  Ecclesiam  Occidentalem  tam 
diro  schismate  laceravit,  hunc  miserrimum  Chris- 
tianitatis  statum  omnes  boni  inter  nostros  deplora- 
bant,  meliora  deprecabantur.  Unica  Christi  Ecclesia 
visibili  caritatis  vinculo  contineatur  oportere  quis 
dubitat  ?  Non  nos  certe  dubitamus,  neque  a 
maioribus  nostris  id  dubitandum  recepimus.  I  mo 
hoc  vinculum  caritatis  temporibus  funestis  dissolu- 
tum  reficere  cuiusque  boni  Christiani  esse  semper 
nobis  est  tradituhi.  Ergo  ut  priora  omittam,  ipsi 


204     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Tractariani  eadem  fere  moliebantur.  Quo  tempore 
Nicolaus  Wiseman,  qui  postea  Cardinalis,  tune 
Vicarius  Apostolicus  pro  Anglia  fuit,  magnam 
unitatis  instaurandae  expectationem  habuit.  I  lie 
conversionem  Angliae  ad  fidem  et  praxim  Catho- 
licam  imprimis  exoptans,  non  nisi  per  Ecclesiae 
Anglicanae  ministerium  hanc  efficiendam  putabat. 
Methodus  diversitatum  explicandarum,  quam 
Tractariani  sequebantur,  ei  quoque  placuit.  Eorum 
quae  Oxonienses  iam  tune  effecerant  non  ignarus, 
populum  rudem  et  cultus  Catholici  paene  oblitum 
ad  meliora  praeparari  videbat,  instruendum  spera- 
bat ;  cum  toto  Ecclesiae  corpore  potius  quam  cum 
singulis  et  privatis  agere  cupiebat.1  Cum  autem 
singuli  ex  Tractarianis  in  Ecclesiam  Romanam,  ut 
dixi,  refugissent,  ceteri  pro  tempore  debilitati  omnes 
vires  ad  causam  domesticam  defendendam  intend- 
erunt.  Nee  tamen  maiorum  obliti  sunt.  Pusey 
post  aliquot  annos  in  eandem  exspectationem  cum 
fervida  spe  et  caritate  rediit.  Anno  1865  Eirenicon* 
suum  edidit,  in  quo  de  unitate  visibili  per  Ecclesiam 
Anglicanam  instauranda  disseruit.  Multa  de  diver- 
sitatibus  cultus  ac  doctrinae  addidit ;  talia  non  ad 
fidem  spectare,  formulas  Anglicanas  cum  Romanis 
dissonas  potius  videri  quam  esse,  potestatem  R. 
Pontificis  non  esse  obstaculum  inevitabile,  et  similia. 
Haec  tanti  viri  epistola  incredibilem  fervorem  exci- 
tavit.  Libri  et  dissertationes  e  prelo  indesinenter 
fluebant.  Sodalitas  pro  precibus  in  hunc  finem 
fundendis  instituta  Anglicanos,  Graecos,  ac  Romanae 
Ecclesiae  subditos  vinculo  caritatis  permultos 

1  Vide,   A  Letter  on  Catholic  Unity,  London,  1841,  cuius  versio 
gallica  habetur  in  Revue  Anglo-Romaine,  Vol.  II,  p.  193,  2  Maii  1896. 

2  An  Eirenicon,  in  a  Letter  to  the  Author  of  The  Christian  Year. 
Oxford,  Parker,  1865. 


"DE   RE   ANGLICAN  A"   AND   ITS  CRITICS     205 

coniunxit.  Ex  ea  re  primus  fuit  exspectationis 
repulsus ;  namque  ad  Sacrum  Officium  de  hac 
sodalitate  relate,  cum  quaedam  de  ecclesia  ex  tribus 
commuinonibus  condenda  infeliciter  in  constitutione 
sodalitatis  fuissent  expressa,  prohibitum  est  ne  in 
eius  operibus  participaretur  (an.  1867).  Frigidum 
et  parum  benevolum  id  multis  visum  est.  Nee 
tamen  opus  fervere  desiit.  Alia  epistola,  quae 
Eirenici  pars  secunda  habetur,  ad  rev.  doct.  J.  H. 
Newman  anno  1869  scripta,  Pusey  aliqua,  quae  de 
cultu  B.  Virginis  in  priori  dixerat,  lenius  explicare 
conatus  est.  Tandem  in  tertia  parte  eodem  anno 
ad  eundem  scripta,  unitatem  sana  ratione  perfici 
posse  ostendit.  "  Eisdem  "  inquit,  "  patribus  nati 
fieri  non  potest  quin  tandem  nos  invicem  intellegere 
debeamus.  Singulari  tuo  amori  et  magnanimi 
caritati  haec  commendam  vix  necesse  est.  Ceteris 
qui  ex  tua  communione  sint,  per  te  haec  tantum 
dicam ;  neque  in  hoc  neque  in  priore  libello  me 
quicquam  ex  eis  quae  vos  de  fide  credatis  tangere 
voluisse.  Nihil  sane  cupiebam  nisi  ut  pro  pace 
solida,  sana,  diuturna,  si  per  me  id  stare  posset, 
contenderem.  Tempora  funestissima  et  dies  tribu- 
lationis  in  terris  exspectamus.  Fides  confirmatur, 
sed  infidelitas  simul  perficitur.  Quid  vero  ad  hanc 
reprimendam  fieri  non  possit,  dummodo  qui  unum 
Dominum  unamque  Fidem  confitentur,  uno  quoque 
animo  sint,  dum  Christianitas  vinculo  caritatis  unita, 
Sancti  Spiritus  influxu  nullis  rixis  vel  corporis 
lacerationibus  impedito,  ad  omnes  in  Illius  amorem 
reducendos  exeat,  quern  omnes  amare,  cui  servire 
atque  obedire  cupimus.  Unum  tantum  lapidem 
offensionis  amovisse  non  parvus  erit  fructus  per 
totum  vitae  cursum  laboranti.  I  lie  autem  solus 


206     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Auctor  pacis  et  amator  potest  cor  patrum  ad  filios 
et  cor  filiorum  ad  patres  convertere.  Domine  opus 
tuum,  in  •media  annorum  vivifica  illud.  In  medio 
annorum  notum  fades  :  cum  iratus  fueris,  misem- 
cordiae  recordaberis."1 

Post  Concilium  Vaticanum  spes  ista  paene  evanuit. 
Pusey  nil  amplius  edidit.  Nonnulli,  quihuic  exspecta- 
tioni  nimis  fortasse  innixi  erant,  nunc  nimis  deiecti  a 
fide  defecerunt.  Anni  sequebantur  interno  tumultu 
turbati.  Nunc  pacem  domi  consecuti,  foras  quoque 
pacem  inquirimus.  Neque  impossibile  id  nobis  vide- 
tur,  qui  tanta  beneficia  a  Deo  accepimus,  tantum 
opus  in  Ecclesia  confectum  iam  vidimus.  Quern 
antecessores  nostri  magnum  et  insuperabilem  montem 
putabant,  in  planum  fieri  posse  nos  non  dubitamus. 

Hinc  novus  animorum  motus,  qui  tamen  non 
novus  sed  renovatus.  Quaestionem  de  Ordinationibus 
Anglicanis  iniimus,  non  quidem  in  ea  totum  dis- 
sensionis  radicem  contineri  putantes,  sed  in  eo  confisi 
quod  hinc  via  ad  animos  conciliandos  pateat. 
Proinde  nostri  huic  multum  instant ;  ordinum  suorum 
et  sacramentorum  veritatem  summa  fiducia  tenent,  et 
studio  singulari  defendunt  Qui  de  his  dubitaveritquo- 
modo  cum  eo  communionis  vel  voluntatem  concipere 
poterunt  ?  Ergo  ne  eis  scandalum  fiat,  quaestionem 
ex  hac  parte  aggrediamur  necesse  est.  Magno  igitur 
gaudio  nostris  erat  audiisse  R.  Pontificem  sponte  in 
his  rebus  versari.  De  eius  voluntate  dubitare,  qui 
epistolam  Ad  Anglos  legit,  omnino  non  potest. 

Ut  Ecclesia  Romana  hoc  opus  in  finem  dirigat 
spes  est  et  exspectatio  totius  Christianitatis. 

T.  A.  LACEY. 

1  Is  Healthful  Reunion  impossible  ?    A  second  Letter  to  the  Very 
Rev.J.  H.  Newman,  D.D.  Oxford,  Parker,  1870. 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS  CRITICS     207 


Appendix 

Quaedam  de  actuali  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae  statu,  ex 
opere  The  Church  Year  Book  intitulato  collecta,  in  con- 
spectu  hie  ponere  liceat. 


I.     STATUS   GENERALIS. 


In  Anglia 

Alibi 

Provinciae   ... 

2 

12 

Dioeceses 

35 

165 

Parochiae    ... 

13800 

circ.  6300 

II.    COMMUNITATES   CLERICORUM. 


Societas 
S.  Joannis 
Evangelistae. 

Domus  principalis  apud  Cowley,  quae  pars  est 
Civitatis  Oxoniensis.  In  Missionibus  et  Exercitiis 
spiritualibus  patres  et  conversi,  votis  perpetuis 
adstricti,  plerumque  versantur.  Domus  habent 
apud  Boston  in  America,  apud  Capetown  in  Africa 
Meridional!,  Bombaiae  et  Poonae  in  India. 

Communitas 
Resurrectionis. 

Domus  apud  Radley.  Fratres  in  Studiis  sacris 
versantur. 

Domus  Puseiana. 

Societas  clericorum  saecularium  vitam  com- 
munem  degentium,  in  sacris  studiis  apud  Oxonien- 
ses  versatorum. 

Domus  Oxoniensis. 

Societas  clericorum  saecularium  qui  vitam  com- 
munem  degentes  opera  missionaria  Londinii  in 
regione  a  pauperrimis  habitata  exercent. 

Missio  Oxoniensis 
ad  Calcutta. 

Societas  eiusdem  generis  pro  Indis  cultioribus  ad 
fidem  convertendis. 

Societas  S.  Pauli. 

Communitas  regularium  curae  spiritual!  Nau- 
tarum  addicta,  olim  in  India  fundata,  nuper  in 
Angliam  inducta. 

Missionarii 
Glocestrenses. 

Collegium  Sacerdotum  Missionariorum  pro 
Dioecesi  Glocestrensi. 

Missionarii 
S.  Andreae. 

Collegium  Sacerdotum  Missionariorum  pro 
Dioecesi  Sarisburiensi. 

208     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


III.     COMMUNITATES   RELIGIOSARUM   VOTIS 
ADSTRICTARUM. 


Nomina 
Communitatum 

Dotnus 

principalis 

Opera  principalia 

"  Devonport  Sisters." 

Ascot. 

Diversa.  Cura  infirmorum  et  orpha- 
norum.  Domus  ad  minus  duo. 

Communitas 
S.  Mariae  Virginis. 

Wantage. 

Cura  feminarum  paenitentium.  In- 
structio  primaria  et  superior.  Opera 
misericordiae  externa.  Plurimae  domus 
tam  in  Anglia  quam  in  Coloniis,  etc. 

Communitas 
S.  Joannis  Baptistae. 

Clewer. 

Cura  feminarum  paenitentium,  or- 
phanorum,  infirmorum,  et  convalescen- 
tium.  Instructio  in  omnibus  gradibus. 
Plurimae  domus. 

"Sorores  Pauperum" 
alias  Societas 
Omnium  Sanctorum. 

Londinii. 

Cura  infirmorum  et  opera  miseri- 
cordiae externa.  Domus  in  Anglia,  in 
America,  in  Africa,  in  India,  etc. 

Societas 
S.  Margaretae. 

East 
Grinstead. 

Cura  pauperum  infirmorum  in  domi- 
bus  propriis,  et  alia  ut  supra.  Pluri- 
mae domus. 

Societas 
S.  Raphaelis. 

Bristol. 

Regulam  Filiarum  Charitatis  a  S. 
Vincentio  datam  maxima  ex  parte 
observant.  Domum  Magilae  in  dioec. 
Zanzibarensi  habent. 

"Sorores  Bethaniae." 

Londinii. 

Exercitia  spiritualia  pro  feminis. 
Domum  habent  in  Assyria  pro  feminis 
instruendis. 

Societas  S.  Petri. 

Horbury. 

Cura  feminarum  paenitentium.  Do- 
mus quattuor. 

Societas 
Omnium  Sanctorum. 

Ditching- 
ham. 

Cura  feminarum  paenitentium.  Do- 
mum in  America  septentrionali  pro  ab- 
originibus  habent. 

Societas  S.  Petri. 

Kilburn. 

Cura  infirmorum,  et  potissimum  in- 
curabilium.  Domus  septem  ad  minus. 

Societas 
S.  Thomae  Martyris. 

Oxonii. 

Instructio,  et  cura  orphanorum. 

Societas 
Sanctae  et  Individuae 
Trinitatis. 

Oxonii. 

Oratio  perpetua  pro  fide  propaganda. 
Instructio  puellarum.  Domum  Canta- 
brigiae  habent. 

Communitas 
SS.  Mariae  Virginis 
et  Scholasticae. 

Mailing. 

Regulam  S.  Benedicti  observant. 

DE   RE  ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS   CRITICS     209 


IV     OPERA   PASTORALIA. 


Missiones 
Foraneae. 

Sodalitates 

Missiones 

Efiscopi 

Society  for  the 
Propagation  of  the  Gospel 
S.  P.  G. 
Church  Missionary  Society 
C.  M.  S. 
Central  African  Mission. 
Et  aliae. 

In  Africa  Occidentali. 
In      ,,      Meridional!. 
In      ,,      Orientali. 
In  India. 
Apud  Sinas. 
In  laponia. 
In  America  Septentrionali, 
pro  aboriginibus. 
In  Guiana. 

6 
9 
4 

10 

6 

4 

10 
i 

Missiones 
in 
Parochiis. 

Anno  1895,  ad  minus  220  habitae  sunt  in  Anglia. 

Secessus.  i 

Anno  1895  habiti  sunt  in  Anglia,  ad  minus,  ]  j  ro  f  ?r?  ^°- 

(  pro  in.i  cis  5  • 

Seminaria. 

In  Anglia,   maior    pars   cleri  in  Universitatibus  educatur. 
Seminaria  9  sunt  Dioecesana,  7  Generalia,  5  pro  Missionibus 
Foraneis.       In   Coloniis   et   in    Americae   Civitatibus    Unitis 
plurima  sunt. 

V.     ELEEMOSYNAE   FIDELIUM. 

In  Anglia  Episcopi  et  Ecclesiae  Cathedrales  fundos  antiquissimos  habent ; 
parochi  pro  decimis  compositiones  a  terrarum  dominis  plerumque  accipiunt. 
Harum  pecuniarum  summa  est  singulis  annis  circiter  155,000,000  librarum 
Italicarum.  Quae  hie  sequuntur,  e  voluntaria  fidelium  liberalitate  in  Anglia 
tantum  addita,  in  libris  Italicis  computantur. 


Pro  Missiont  bus 
Foraneis 

Pro  Clero 
et  Cultu 

Pro  Ecclesiarum 
Fabricis 

Pro  Scholis 
aedificandis 

Pro  Scholis 
sustinendis 

Anno  1894 
L.  15,500,000 

Anno  1894 
L.  49,  500,000 

Singulis 
annis  1860-84 
L.  38,000,000 

Annis  1870-94 
L.  202,000,000 

Anno  1894 
L.  16,800,000 

2io     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

II 
RISPOSTA    ALL'OPUSCOLO 

" De  Re  Anglicana" 

In  un  Opuscolo  intitolato  "  De  Re  Anglicana " 
recentemente  dato  alia  luce  da  uno  scrittore  Angli- 
cano,  vi  sono  moltissimi  error!  che  possono  facil- 
mente  ingannare  il  lettore.  Abbiamo  percio  creduto 
necessario  di  provvedere  con  una  nostra  risposta 
che  servira  a  correggere  e  commentare  questa  pub- 
blicazione.  Divideremo  il  nostro  lavoro  in  due 
parti  :  Nella  prima  parte  riporteremo  successiva- 
mente  gli  errori  contenuti  in  alcuni  paragrafi,  accen- 
nando  le  pagine.  Nella  seconda  parte  diremo 
brevemente  della  situazione  religiosa  in  Inghilterra 
e  della  speranza  di  una  riunione. 

PARTE    PRIMA 

ERRORI  PRINCIPALI  CONTENUTI 
NELL'OPUSCOLO  "DE  RE  ANGLICANA" 

ORIGINE    E    NATURA    DELLO    SCISMA 
SOTTO    ENRICO    VIII 

"Reformatio  sub  Henrico  VIII  incepta.  nihil  contra  fidem  CATHO- 
LICAM  effecit.  QU^EDAM  fateor,  facinorosa  quaedam  adhuc  plo- 
randa  evenerunt ;  a  communione  Ecclesiae  Romance  recessum  est, 
vita  religiosa  extirpata ;  in  his  autem  quae  ad  doctrinam  spectant 
nihil  mutatum.  Nee  tamen  etiam  tune  deerant  qui  novas  res  in  hac 
parte  molirentur,  inter  quos  et  episcopi  rari  erant,  quorum  princeps 
Cranmer"  (p.  i,/.  ad  init.). 

1°  L'Autore  come  Anglicano  nega  che  il  Primato 
di  giurisdizione  del  Romano  Pontefice  faccia  parte 
della  dottrina  cattolica. 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"   AND   ITS   CRITICS     211 

2°  Dove  dice  "quadam"  dovrebbe  dire  invece 
"  multa  nimis"  Perche  sotto  Enrico  VIII  sebbene 
fosse  conservata  la  Liturgia  cattolica,  nondimeno 
furono  constituiti  nelle  sede  principali  Vescovi  noto- 
riamente  eretici  e  fautori  accaniti  de  protestantesimo. 
Cromwell  semplice  laico  e  dopo  il  Sovrano  la  per- 
sona piu  potente  del  regno,  Vicario  generale  della 
Corona  per  le  cose  spiritual!  e  che  negava  aperta- 
mente  il  sacramento  dell'Ordine,  fu  messo  a  capo 
del  governo  ecclesiastico.  Egli  si  uni  a  Cranmer 
ed  a'suoi  seguaci  in  tal  guisa  che  i  predicatori  della 
dottrina  riformata  furono  mandati  da  essi  in  tutta 
1'Inghilterra  propagando  la  loro  eresia. 

3°  "Rari"  Erano  invece  parecchi :  Cranmer  (di 
Canterbury),  Holbeach  (di  Lincoln),  Goodrich  (di 
Ely),  Ridley  (di  Rochester),  Barlow  (di  Menevia), 
e  Shaxton  (di  Salisbury),  tutti  riformatori  ben  co- 
nosciuti.  Altri  otto  si  mostrarono  piu  o  meno  in- 
differenti,  diciamo  "opportunisti." 


VESCOVI    SOTTO    EDOARDO 

"Attamen  episcopi,  qui  animo  et  sententia  CATHOLICI  erant, 
sedes  suas  RETINUERUNT,  novisque  rebus  quantum  possent  sese 
accommodarunt.  NONNULLI  autem  ex  his  detrusi  sunt  (p.  i  in 
fine). 

i  °  In  nessuna  maniera  possono  chiamarsi  cattolici 
quelli  che  ritennero  le  loro  sedi  sotto  Edoardo. 
Alcuni  fra  gli  "  opportunisti "  servili  e  finti  con- 
servarono  le  loro  sedi  e  le  loro  rendite,  e  questi 
non  ebbero  una  sola  parola  di  protesta  mentre  si 
rovesciavano  empiamente  gli  altari  nelle  chiese  per 
ordine  del  Re  e  di  Cranmer,  e  si  oltraggiavano  i 
dommi  cattolici  dichiarandoli  blasfematori. 


212     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

2°  " Nonnulli"  Invece  tutti  i  Vescovi  che  in 
qualche  maniera  conservavano  un  sentimento  catto- 
lico  od  un  resto  di  venerazione  per  i  dommi  cattolici 
furono  cacciati  dalle  loro  sedi  sotto  Edoardo.  Cosi 
Gardiner  (di  Winchester),  Bonner  (di  Londra), 
Heath  (di  Worcester),  Tunstall  (di  Durham),  Voy- 
sey  (di  Exeter),  Day  (di  Chichester)  furono  tutti 
destituiti,  parecchi  carcerati  ed  a  loro  posto  sostituiti 
eretici  ben  conosciuti. 

In  questa  maniera  Cranmer  ed  i  fautori  della  sua 
eresia  ottennero  facilissimamente  la  preponderanza. 

VESCOVI    SOTTO    MARIA 

"Maria  igitur  regnum  excipiente  NONNULLI  episcopi  destituti 
sunt,  inter  quos  Cranmer;  CETERI  manebant"  (p.  2,  in  princip.). 

Queste  parole  NONNULLI  e  CETERI  non 
possono  ammettersi.  Di  23  vescovi  che  si  trova- 
vano  al  posto  alia  morte  di  Edoardo,  non  alcuni, 
ma  la  maggior  parte  ossia  13  furono  immediata- 
mente  destituiti. 

Furono  destituiti  1 3  Vescovi  eretici ;  e  furono 
restituiti  quelli  che  sotto  Edoardo  erano  stati  desti- 
tuiti, ossia  6.  Furono  riabilitati  6  altri  dopo  fatta  la 
penitenza  e  1'abjura  nelle  mani  del  Card.  Legato.1 
I  nuovi  Vescovi  costituiti  dal  Legato  furono  14. 

SOTTO  ELISABETTA 

"  Consiliarios  qui  sub  Maria  rempublicam  direxerant  PLERUM- 
QUE  (Elisabetha)  retinuit"  (p.  2  verso  la  meta). 

Abbiamo  qui  un'asserzione  erronea.  Difatti  imme- 
diatamente  dopo  la  sua  venuta  al  trono  Elisabetta 

1  Di  questi  vescovi  riabilitati  dal  Card.  Polo  nessuno  era  stato 
qonsecrato  secondo  I'Ordinale  anglicano. 


"DE  RE   ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS  CRITICS     213 

che  dalla  gioventu  favoriva  1'eresia  si  diede  a 
promuovere  ardentemente  ma  con  prudenza  la  causa 
della  riforma.  Chiamo  al  suo  consiglio  quelli  che 
favorivano  la  nuova  dottrina  e  in  guisa  tale  che  nel 
mese  stesso  di  sua  incoronazione  si  preparava  gia 
con  accuratezza  nel  consiglio  regio  un  insieme  di 
leggi  contro  la  fede  cattolica  ed  il  papato.  Abbiamo 
ancora  le  minute  di  questo  consiglio  negli  archivi  del 
regno.  Le  leggi  principali  di  questa  natura  stabilite 
nel  suo  primo  parlamento  furono  le  seguenti : 

1  °   Una  legge  che  toglieva  le  annate  e  ie  decime  che 
si  pagavano   alia    Sede   Apostolica  per  darle   alia 
Regina. 

2  °  Una  legge  che  aboliva  assolutamenle  la  giurisdi- 
zione  del  Romano  Pontefice  e  riconosceva  la  Regina 
come  governatrice  suprema  della  chiesa  anglicana. 

3°  Una  legge  che  abrogava  la  liturgia  cattolica 
e  introduceva  di  nuovo  la  2a  liturgia  di  Edoardo  VI, 
ossia  quella  piu  protestante^  con  pochissime  muta- 
zioni} 


Queste  leggi  furono  approvate  malgrado  la  pro- 
testa  di  tutti  i  vescovi  e  del  clero  cattolico.  In  questa 
maniera  fin  dal  primo  anno  del  suo  regno  Elisabetta 
distrusse  la  chiesa  cattolica  in  Inghilterra  e  stabili 
su  base  sicura  e  nel  miglior  modo  che  poteva  la 
religione  protestante.  Si  deve  notare  che  1'intenzione 
eretica  della  regina  e  de'  suoi  consiglieri  si  deduce 
evidentemente  dal  fatto  che  nell'abolizione  della  fede 
cattolica  non  cercarono  di  ritornare  neanche  allo 
stato  di  cose  esistente  sotto  Enrico  VIII  dopo  che 
era  gia  stata  esclusa  la  giurisdizione  del  Romano 

1  Queste  mutazioni  sono  riportate  nella  nostra  esposizione  "  De 
ordinibus  Anglicanis  "  pag.  32. 


2i4     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Pontefice.  Ne  si  contentarono  di  restituire  la  religione 
riformata  quale  fu  introdotta  sotto  Edoardo  VI 
quando  si  manteneva  almeno  un  residue  della  cre- 
denza  cattolica.  Ma  espressamente  stabilirono  colle 
loro  leggi  la  seconda  liturgia,  ossia  la  protestante 
all'accesso,  che  massimamente  piaceva  ai  riformatori 
e  dalla  quale  fu  cancellato  ogni  vestigio  del  sacerdozio 
cattolico  e  del  sacrifizio.  Con  alcune  poche  mutazioni 
vollero  restituire  questa  liturgia  come  regola  pubblica 
di  fede  e  di  preghiera.  Si  aggiunga  che  il  Parker 
arcivescovo  di  Canterbury  e  tutti  i  nuovi  vescovi  ed 
il  clero  dopo  avere  destituito  i  cattolici  sottoscrissero 
volentieri  all'articolo  XXIX  che  negava  la  presenza 
reale,  ed  all'art.  XXXI  che  dichiarava  che  i  sacrifizi 
delle  messe  erano  favole  blasfematorie  ed  imposture 
pericolose.  Gli  storici  piu  segnalati  d'Inghilterra, 
quantunque  anglicani  (Nicolao  Pocock  ed  altri), 
comunemente  ammettono  senza  esitazione  che  i 
vescovi  ed  il  clero  costituito  sotto  Elisabetta  tennero 
ed  insegnarono  quasi  universalmente  per  un  secolo 
intiero  la  dottrina  sacramentale  di  Zwinglio  e  di 
Calvino.  II  chiarissimo  Card.  Newman  (lett.  a  W. 
Hutton)  stabilisce  la  medesima  conclusione  dopo  un 
esame  accuratissimo  dei  fatti.  Sarebbe  forse  difficile 
di  ritrovare  in  tutta  la  storia  ecclesiastica  una 
mutazione  o  meglio  una  rivoluzione  dottrinale  piu 
completa  e  piu  radicalmente  attuata,  di  quella 
portata  a  termine  da  Elisabetta  in  Inghilterra 
1'anno  1559. 


"DE  RE  ANGLIC  AN  A"  AND   ITS  CRITICS     215 


IL   CLERO   SOTTO    ELISABETTA 

"  PAUCI  e  clero  novis  rebus  sese  accomodare  recusarunt,  plerique 
spe  fortasse  meliorum  quieti  manebant.  Universa  Ecclesia  Anglicana 
EISDEM  LEGIBUS  EODEM  CULTU  constanter  utebatur"(p.  4, 
verso  la  meta). 

i  °  E  inesatto  il  dire  che  pochi  si  rifiutarono  (pauci 
recusarunt).  Infatti  tutti  i  vescovi,  con  una  sola 
eccezione,  resistettero  pubblicamente  e  colla  massima 
energia.  Senza  dubbio  la  maggior  parte  del  clero 
defeziono  ;  ma  secondo  le  investigazioni  piu  recenti 
il  numero  de'  chierici  che  si  rifiuto  ad  accomodarsi 
alle  novita  fu  assai  maggiore  di  quello  che  comune- 
mente  si  suppone ;  certamente  supero  i  due  mila. 
Si  e  trovato  adesso  per  esempio,  e  lo  asseriscono  il 
Pocock  ed  altri,  che  moltissimi  lasciarono  i  loro 
benefizi  ed  in  questa  maniera  non  comparvero  mai 
avanti  agl'  inquisitori  della  regina. 

2°  Se  colle  parole  "  UNIVERSA  ECCLESIA 
ANGLICANA  cisdem  legibus  eodemque  cultu 
CONSTANTER  UTEBATUR"  si  vuol  fare 
intendere  che  le  leggi,  ed  i  principii  del  culto  intro- 
dotti  da  Elisabetta  furon  quelli  che  esistevano  ai 
tempi  cattolici,  e  assolutamente  falso.  Perche  :  i.° 
alia  fede  cattolica  furono  sostituiti  GLI  ART  I  CO  LI 
DI  RE  LI GI ONE  che  insegnavano  chiaramente 
le  eresie  della  riforma.  2.°  Alia  liturgia  cattolica  fu 
sostituita  la  liturgia  Eduardiana  dalla  quale  tutto 
cio  che  accenna  alia  presenza  reale  al  sacrifizio 
ed  al  sacerdozio  cattolico  e  stato  a  bello  studio 
cancellato. 

3°  Invece  del  primato  della  Sede  Apostolica  il  Re 


A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

e  la  Regina  vennero  dichiarati  governatori  supremi 
della  Chiesa  in  terra. 

Un  cambiamento  piu  completo  e  piii  radicale 
dommatico,  liturgico  ed  organico  si  puo  appena 
concepire. 

I    CATTOLICI    SOTTO    ELISABETTA 

"  Certe  post  aliquot  annos,  cum  Pius  V  per  Bullam  Regnans  in 
Excelsis  Elizabetham  ejusque  fautores  excommunicasset,  ei  qui 
auctoritati  Pontificias  maxime  faverent  ab  hac  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae 
unitate  RECESSERUNT"  (p.  4  verso  la  fine). 

Al  contrario,  quelli  che  erano  massimamente 
favorevoli  all'  autorita  pontificia,  ossia  i  cattolici, 
non  ebbero  mai  comunione  colla  setta  anglicana  e 
quindi  da  essa  non  potevano  ritirarsi.  Tant'  e  vero 
che  non  accomodaronsi  alle  eresie  anglicane,  che 
molti  in  tutta  Inghilterra  soffrirono  la  perdita  dei 
beni  e  preferirono  la  carcere  piuttosto  che  trovarsi 
presenti  anche  materialmente  al  rito  anglicano.  E 
infatti  Elisabetta  non  trovo  mezzo  piu  vantaggioso 
per  obligare  i  cattolici  a  frequentare  le  chiese 
anglicane  deH'imporre  multe  ripetute  all'  eccesso. 
I  nostri  archivi  attestano  ancora  oggi  la  resistenza 
dei  cattolici  fedeli  col  registrare  che  le  multe 
pagate  salirono  alia  somma  di  1,000,000  di  sterline 
(25,000,000  di  lire  it.).  Questo  dira  in  eterno  come 
lo  dice  pure  il  sangue  dei  nostri  martiri  che  non 
manco  il  piccolo  gregge  di  fedeli  che  non  voile 
macchiarsi  dell'  eresia  anglicana. 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS  CRITICS     217 

BELLA  DUPLICE  SCUOLA  ANGLICANA 

SOTTO   ELISABETTA 
E  DEL  COSl  DETTO  CATTOLICISMO 

"Ex  his  partes  PURITANS  originem  habuerunt.  Exinde  magna 
erat  intra  Ecclesiam  Anglicanam  controversia,  quae  usque  hodie  aliquo 
modo  subsistit.  Universi  enim  eisdem  ritibus  usi,  eisdem  fidei  doc- 
trinis  adstricti,  de  casremoniis  de  regimine  pastoral!,  de  potestate 
clavium  exercitio,  denique  de  doctrinis  gratise  acriter  disputabant. 
Partes  Puritans,  partes  QUAS  CATHOLICAS  VOCAMUS,  non 
alio  modo  in  Ecclesite  Anglicanae  unitate  sese  tenebant  quam  olim  in 
regno  Francico  consistebant  partes  ultramontanse  et  Gallicanas"  (p.  4 
in  fine). 

Qui  si  insinua  un  errore  degno  di  speciale  osser- 
vazione.  Si  fa  supporre  non  solo  che  i  Ritualisti  si 
possano  chiamar  cattolici,  ma  che  questi  Ritualisti, 
che  oggi  vogliono  il  nome  di  cattolici,  hanno  in 
qualche  modo  esistito  dai  primi  anni  del  regno  di 
Elisabetta  fino  ad  oggi.  Cio  e  storicamente  falso. 
Bastera  accennare  alcuni  fatti.  La  controversia  fra 
i  Puritani  e  gli  Anglicani  si  raggirava  intorno  al 
regime  episcopale,  alia  liturgia  ed  alia  predestina- 
zione.  Ma  ne  allora,  ne  per  un  intiero  secolo  dopo 
Elisabetta  possiamo  trovare  alcun  vestigio  di  quelle 
dottrine  che  i  Ritualisti  anglicani  vogliono  additare 
come  cattoliche.  Molti  Anglicani  di  quel  secolo 
resistettero  ai  Puritani  per  difendere  il  regime  epis- 
copale almeno  come  piu  conveniente.  Difesero 
anche  la  liturgia  Eduardiana  contro  le  orazioni 
libere  e  spontanee  dei  Calvinisti,  ed  il  potere  della 
scomunica  e  dell'assoluzione  in  foro  esterno,  almeno 
in  senso  cosi  detto  DECLARATORIO.  Ma  fra  i 
moltissimi  VESCOVI,  SCRITTORI  E  PRE- 
DICATORI  ANGLICANI  di  quel  secolo  si  puo 
nominare  appena  UN  SOLO  CHE  CREDESSE 


2i8     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

ALLA  PRESENZA  REALE  IN  SENSO 
OBJETTIVO,  AL  SACRIFIZIO  BELLA 
MESSA  O  AL  SACERDOZIO  IN  SENSO 
CATTOLICO.1  Tutti  invece  rigettarono  pub- 
blicamente  queste  dottrine  colla  medesima  ostilita 
degli  stessi  Puritani,  e  le  hanno  combattute  con 
veemenza  nelle  loro  prediche  e  nei  loro  scritti. 
Sono  forse  questi  che  i  Ritualisti  moderni  vogliono 
additare  come  predecessor!  cattolici  ?  Neanche 
dopo  un  secolo  ai  tempi  dell'Arcivescovo  Laud  pos- 
siamo  trovare  un  solo  che  ammette  il  sacerdozio  o  il 
sacramento  e  sacrifizio  dell'Eucaristia  in  sense  cat- 
tolico.  Vi  sono  alcuni,  "  rari  nantes  in  gurgite 
vasto "  che  usano  cautamente  qualche  espressioni 
cattoliche,  come  del  resto  fanno  anche  altri  eretici. 
Ma  se  esaminiamo  i  loro  scritti,  ci  accorgiamo  subito 
che  quelle  espressioni  si  usavano  in  senso  evidente- 
mente  eretico  e  contrario  alia  fede  cattolica.  Percio 
prima  dell'  apparire  dei  Trattariani  (anno  1830)  si 
trovera  uno  appena  degli  Anglicani  che  credesse  al 
sacerdozio,  al  sacrifizio  o  alia  presenza  reale  in  senso 
cattolico.  Anche  oggi  cio  che  insegna  costante- 
mente  la  maggior  parte  degli  stessi  Ritualisti  sopra 
questi  punti  di  dottrina,  e  cio  che  vanno  predicando 
costantemente,  difficilmente  si  concilia  coll'  insegna- 
mento  cattolico. 

1  Alcuni  ammettevano  la  presenza  reale  "per  gratiam  in  anima 
communicantis?  e  cio  non  negavano  Cranmer  e  Calvino.  Altri  am- 
mettevano che  1'Eucaristia  e  sacrifizio  ma  nel  senso  di  un  sacrifizio 
"  laudis  et  gratiarum  actionis  o  "panis  et  vini  materialist 


"DE   RE  ANGLIC  AN  A"   AND   ITS   CRITICS      219 

BELLA  DOTTRINA  ANGLICANA 

"  Ecclesia  Anglicana  e  tot  periculis  elapsa  ab  aliis  ecclesiis  nationa- 
libus  in  unitate  Catholica  comprehensis  nihil  distulit  nisi  quod  com- 
munione  sacrorum  cum  Sancta  Sede  careret"  (p.  5  verso  la  meta). 

v 

Asserzione  falsissima.  E  ben  noto,  e  il  popolo 
inglese  con  tutti  i  suoi  storici  piu  segnalati  lo 
asserisce  con  noi  che  per  tre  secoli  e  fino  al  1830 
non  vi  era  una  sola  chiesa  parrocchiale  o  cattedrale 
in  tutta  Inghilterra  nella  quale  non  si  predicasse 
pubblicamente  e  costantemente  la  dottrina  protes- 
tante,  o  nella  quale  non  si  rigettasse  con  oltraggio 
e  scherno  il  domma  cattolico  del  sacrifizio  della 
messa  e  della  presenza  reale.  Anche  oggi  la  im- 
mensa  maggioranza  del  popolo  e  molti  vescovi 
anglicani  rigettano  le  dottrine  dei  Ritualisti  e  non 
vogliono  sentire  parlare  dei  dommi  sopraccennati, 
neppure  in  questo  senso  modificato.  I  Ritualisti 
rivendicano  il  nome  di  Cattolici  precisamente  dal 
fatto  che  essi  s'immaginano  credere  fedelmente  a 
quei  dommi  principali  della  fede  cattolica  che  sonno 
comuni  alia  chiesa  orientale  ed  occidentale  :  vale  a 
dire  al  sacerdozio,  che  ha  il  potere  di  assolvere  e  di 
ritenere  i  peccati,  alia  presenza  reale  e  al  vero 
sacrifizio  eucaristico  identico  al  sacrifizio  della  croce. 
Ora  se  vogliamo  prendere  il  nome  di  Cattolici 
secondo  questo  criterio  e  assolutamente  certo  che 
fra  gli  Anglicani  non  avvene  uno  fra  venti  anzi  fra 
cinquanta  che  possa  arrogarsi  questo  nome.  E  un 
fatto  notorio,  e  mille  volte  asserito  in  mille  maniere 
ogni  giorno  dal  popolo  inglese,  che  tutti  gli  Angli- 
cani rigettano  energicamente  non  solo  il  primato  del 
Romano  Pontefice,  ma  anche  1'interpretazione  cat- 
tolica dei  dommi  sopraccennati.  E  dunque  un  errore 


ed  una  vera  derisione  di  volere  considerare  questi 
Ritualist!  come  "LA  CHIESA  ANGLICANA." 
Cio  sarebbe  prendere  erroneamente  una  parte  esigua 
per  il  tutto.  Noi  godiamo  certamente  e  ringraziamo 
il  Signore  che  fmalmente  una  parte  dei  nostri  con- 
cittadini  accetta  questi  nostri  dommi  in  un  senso 
che  si  avvicina  a  poco  a  poco  al  senso  cattolico. 
Ma  la  verita  esige  da  noi  impedire  che  all'estero  si 
prenda  I'enorme  equivoco  di  credere  che  questa 
decima  parte  degli  Anglicani  costituisca  il  ceto 
Anglicano. 

DELLA    TENTATA    CONCILIAZIONE    TRA    LE    FORMOLE 
ANGLICANE    ED    I    DECRETI    DEL    CONCILIO    DI    TRENTO 

"  Quocirca  decreta  ac  definitiones  Concilii  Tridentini  summo  studio 
tractabant  (Tractariani)  ut  cum  eis  formulas  ac  definitiones  Angli- 
canas  non  adeo  dissonas  esse  monstrarent  ut  ineluctabilis  inde  dis- 
sensio  eveniret "  (p.  6  verso  la  meta). 

L'Autore  principale  di  questa  tentata  conciliazione 
tra  i  decreti  di  Trento  e  gli  articoli  di  religione 
Anglicana  fu  il  chiarissimo  J.  H.  Newman  (poi 
Cardinale  di  S.  R.  Chiesa)  il  quale  prima  della  sua 
conversione  alia  fede  cattolica  fu  il  Capo  tanto 
lodato  dei  cosi  detti  Trattariani.  Colla  grazia  di  Dio 
egli  nconobbe  la  futilita  di  questo  tentative  ed  entro 
nel  seno  della  Chiesa  seguito  poi  da  molti  suoi 
discepoli.1  Come  cattolico  il  Newman  spiego,  dopo 
alcuni  anni,  la  impossibilita  di  tale  conciliazione  e 
nella  sua  lettera  al  Rev.  Hutton,  nella  quale  espone 
anche  chiaramente  la  sua  sentenza  contro  gli  ordini 
Anglicani,  a  vedere  con  argomenti  irrefragabili  come 
tutti  i  vescovi  e  teologi  per  tre  secoli  dopo  Elisa- 

1  Da  quel  tempo  ad  oggi  si  contano  piu  di  500  Ministri  Anglicani 
convertiti  alia  Chiesa  Cattolica. 


"DE   RE  ANGLICAN  A"   AND   ITS   CRITICS      221 

betta  negavano  assolutamente  la  successione  apos- 
tolica  e  gli  altri  dommi  di  Trento.  Nessuno  meglio 
di  Newman  conosceva  I'Anglicanismo.  Nessuno 
erasi  mostrato  piu  divoto  a  quella  setta  fin  dalla 
prima  fanciullezza.  Nella  mente,  nei  scritti  e  nella 
vita  di  questo  dottissimo  ed  illustrissimo  Cardinale 
abbiamo  la  migliore  interpretazione  pratica  del 
movimento  di  Oxford  e  dell'opera  dei  Trattariani. 
E  prova  all'evidenza  la  futilita  deH'Anglicanismo  per 
quanto  si  voglia  travestire  con  apparenze  cattoliche. 


STATO    PRESENTE    DELL  ANGLICANISMO 

"  Tota  enim  facies  Ecclesiae  his  quinquaginta  annis  renovata  est. 
DOCTRINA  CATHOLICA  UBIQUE  PR^DICATUR.  De 
praeceptis  novae  legis,  de  auxiliis  gratiae,  de  usu  Sacramentorum 
populus  instruitur  "  (p.  7.  ad  inif). 

Un'altro  asserzione  falsissima.  Nessuno  di  noi 
certamente  vorra  negare  che  I'Anglicanismo  abbia 
cambiato  molte  cose  negli  ultimi  50  anni.  Lo 
diciamo  volentieri  e  ne  daremo  la  spiegazione.  Ma 
per  asserire  che  la  dottrina  cattolica  e  dapertutto 
predicata  bisogna  aver  perduto  il  senno.  L'espres- 
sione  " Doctrina  Catholica"  si  prende  qui  in  senso 
Ritualistico,  ossia  per  significare  alcune  dottrine  e 
pratiche  dei  Ritualisti  che  scimmiottano  piu  o  meno 
la  Chiesa  Cattolica.  Essi  prendono  le  nostre 
dottrine  e  le  nostre  pratiche  cambiandole  secondo  il 
loro  intento,  ammettendo  alcune,  rigettando  altre,  a 
norma  del  loro  giudizio  private,  chiamandole  poi 
"  la  Dottrina  Cattolica."  Giova  pero  notare  che 
anche  in  questo  senso  accomodato  la  dottrina  cosi 
detta  cattolica  si  ammette  solamente  da  una  piccola 
sezione  della  setta  Anglicana,  e  non  la  troviamo  in 


222     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

una  chiesa  sopra  dieci.  Ora  se  1'espressione  Dot- 
trina  cattoiica  si  prende  nel  suo  vero  senso,  ossia 
per  significare  cio  che  insegna  la  Chiesa  Romana, 
in  cio  che  riguarda  alia  costituzione  della  chiesa, 
questa  dottrina  non  esiste  fra  gli  Anglicani ;  se  si 
tratta  della  transustanziazione  se  ne  trova  appena 
appena  qualche  traccia  ;  trattandosi  dell'Eucaristia 
o  del  sacrifizio  della  Messa  secondo  la  defmizione 
del  Concilio  di  Trento  rarissime  volte  s'incontra  ; 
e  questa  dottrina  non  e  predicata  ne  creduta  nelle 
chiese  Anglicane. 


FREQUENZA  DELL  EUCARISTIA  FRA  GLI  ANGLICANI. 

"  De  sanctorum  meritis,  de  consiliis  perfectionis  non  amplius 
siletur.  Ubi  rarius  Eucharistia  olim  celebrabatur,  nunc  JUGITER 
sacrificium  offertur ;  ubi  pauci  Mensam  Domini  adibant,  nunc 
FREQUENS  POPULUS  digna  cum  ADORATIONE  de  cibo 
caelesti  participat"  (p.  7,  circ.  med.). 

i°  Non  si  puo  citare  un  solo  vescovo  Anglicano 
che  permetta  in  qualsiasi  modo  la  invocazione  dei 
Santi.  Non  vi  e  una  chiesa  pubblica  dove  sia 
approvato  questo  culto.  Qualche  volta  lo  troveremo, 
e  vero,  malgrado  le  proteste  della  massa  degli 
Anglicani  e  dei  Vescovi,  ma  sara  in  una  chiesa 
sopra  mille. 

2°  Senza  dubbio  1'Eucaristia  si  celebra  con  piu 
frequenza  adesso  che  cinquanta  anni  fa.  Allora 
non  si  celebrava  ordinariamente  piu  di  tre  o  quattro 
volte  all1  anno  in  ciascuna  chiesa  parrocchiale.  Oggi 
in  regola  ordinaria  si  celebra  una  volta  al  mese. 
In  alcune  poche  chiese  si  fa  ogni  domenica. 
Rarissime  volte  poi  e  quasi  mai  si  celebra 
1'Eucaristia  tutti  i  giorni  nella  chiesa  parrocchiale. 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS  CRITICS      223 

3°  Non  si  puo  dire  che  il  popolo  AngHcano 
frequenti  1'Eucaristia.  Si  dica  piuttosto  se  ne  priva 
un  po'  di  prima,  Secondo  la  relazione  piu  recente 
ufficialmente  pubblicata  dagli  stessi  Anglicani  nel 
loro  ANNUARIO  fra  16  milioni  di  seguaci  non  si 
contano  che  2  milioni  che  si  comunicano. 

4°  L'Adorazione  dell'Eucaristia  e  proibita  es- 
pressamente  nella  rubrica  del  Libro  di  Preghiera 
Comune  e  negli  Articoli  di  Religione.  Ne  fra  gli 
Ano-Hcani  che  si  comunicano  vi  e  uno  fra  cento  che 

o 

intenda  minimamente  di  adorare  il  Sacramento. 
La  prassi  di  adorare  1'Eucaristia  trovasi  soltanto  in 
pochissime  chiese  o  cappelle  della  cosi  detta  Scuola 
Ritualista. 

DEI    MEZZI  CATTOLICI  ADOPERATI 
DAGLI  ANGLICANI. 

"Multa  quoque  ex  aliis  ecclesiis  grati  MUTUAVIMUS,  secessus 
seu  exercitia  spiritualia  tarn  pro  clero  quam  pro  laicis,  missiones  in 
civitatibus  et  in  pagis,  stationes  quadragesimales,  hoc  genus  omne, 
iam  NOBIS  propria  sunt"  (p.  7  verso  la  meta). 

Qui  ammette  giustamente  1'Autore  che  i  Ritualisti 
moderni  hanno  cercato  di  combattere  la  Chiesa 
cattolica  in  Inghilterra  rivolgendo  contro  di  esse 
le  sue  proprie  armi.  Ma  quando  dice  "  nobis  propria 
sunt "  non  parla  affato  1'Autore  per  tutto  il  ceto 
Anglicano  ma  solamente  per  la  scuola  alia  quale 
appartiene.  L'immensa  maggioranza  degli  Angli- 
cani rifugge  da  simili  mezzi  e  non  se  ne  interessa. 
Pero  alcune  poche  persone  sincere  e  divote  trovano 
in  questo  il  mezzo  di  giungere  a  Dio  ed  alia  verita 
e  questo  ci  da  consolazione  e  speranza  di  grazia  piu 
abbondante. 


224      A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


DELLUFFICIO    DIVING    FRA    GLI    ANGLICANI 

"OFFICIUM  DIVINUM  pro  usu  nostro,  semel  tantum  in 
mense  recitato  Psalterio  levius  est  onus,  sed  in  pluribus  dioecesibus 
totum  Psalterium,  sacerdotibus  ALIIS  ALIOS  psalmos  legentibus, 
ex  CONSTITUTIONE  episcopi  quotidie  recitatur"  (p.  7  verso 
la  fine). 

i°  L'Ufficio  recitato  dagli  Anglicani  e  com- 
pletamente  diverse  dall'Ufficio  Divino  della  Chiesa 
Cattolica.  L'Ufficio  Anglicano  non  e  altro  che 
un  complesso  di  salmi  e  di  lezioni  della  Sacra 
Scrittura  sostituito  da  Cranmer  e  dagli  altri 
Riformatori  al  Breviario,  dal  quale  pero  e  stata 
esclusa  con  massima  cura  ogni  invocazione  ai  Santi. 
Ne  il  recitarlo,  per  quanto  breve  sia,  e  prescritto 
sotto  pena  di  peccato.  Dal  clero  e  ritenuto  come 
semplice  consiglio  di  divozione  e  si  lascia  in  disparte 
dalla  maggioranza. 

2°  La  prassi  di  recitare  il  Salterio  "  A  His  alios 
psalmos  legentibus  "  e  evidentemente  un  peso  lievis- 
simo,  giacche  distribuito  il  Psalterio  fra  150 
Ministri,  non  rimane  altro  che  un  salmo  a  ciascuno 
da  recitare.  Ma  anche  questa  prassi  neppure  e 
imposta  daH'Autorita  ne  trae  seco  obbligo  alcuno. 
Perche  i  vescovi  Anglicani  non  hanno,  secondo  le 
leggi  dello  Stato,  potere  alcuno  di  emanare  costitu- 
zioni  che  obblighino  il  Clero.  Un  obbligo  di  tal 
genere  solo  puo  venire  da  una  legge  Canonica 
la  quale  presuppone  il  consenso  della  Regina,  come 
gli  stessi  Vescovi  Anglicani  riconoscono  di  non 
avere  tal  potere. 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS  CRITICS      225 


DELLO    STATO    RELIGIOSO   TRA   GLI    ANGLICANI 

"  Statum  religiosum  qui  usque  a  sasculo  XVI  penitus  obsoleverat 
anni  recentes  nova  cum  devotione  reduxerunt >?  (p.  7  verso  la  fine.) 

i°  Non  e  vero  che  lo  stato  religiose  fra  gli 
Anglicani  dal  secolo  XVI  in  poi  obsoleverat  sola- 
mente  ;  per  tre  secoli  fu  condannato  e  oltraggiato 
dai  Riformatori,  dai  Vescovi  e  dai  Teologi 
Anglicani. 

2°  Dopo  il  Puseismo  ed  il  MOVIMENTO  DI 
OXFORD  prevalse  il  desiderio  di  adottare  quanto 
apparteneva  alia  chiesa  orientale  ed  occidentale, 
e  fra  i  Puseisti  ed  i  Ritualisti  furono  fondate  alcune 
case  di  monache  o  meglio  di  donne  in  abito 
monacale.  E  tanto  vero  che  questa  rinnovazione 
dello  STATO  RELIGIOSO  non  proveniva  dalla 
chiesa  Anglicana  propriamente  detta  che  al  prin- 
cipio  s'incontrarono  difficolta  immense  per  la 
resistenza  dei  Vescovi  e  della  maggioranza  del 
popolo.  Dopo  poi  alcuni  uomini,  senza  approva- 
zione  alcuna  della  Chiesa  Anglicana,  si  riunirono 
in  societa  per  fare  vita  comune.  Ma  anche  oggi 
questo  tentative  si  restringe  al  solo  gruppo  dei 
Ritualisti,  e  la  maggioranza  degli  Anglicani  non 
riconosce  tali  religiosi. 

3°  Le  Monache  Anglicane  sono  pochissime  di 
numero :  i  Religiosi  sono  anche  meno.  Molte  poi 
fra  le  monache  non  sono  legate  da  voti.  Ma  tutte 
insieme  non  passano  le  800.  In  quanto  agli 
uomini,  eccezione  fatta  forse  della  societa  detta 
di  S.  Giovanni  Evangelista  presso  Cowley,  se  ne 
trovano  appena  che  in  qualche  modo  si  possono 
chiamare  comunita  religiose.  Gli  stessi  Anglicani 
Q 


226     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

nei  loro  fogli  confessano  che  queste  societa  per 
gli  uomini  sono  rarissime,  mantenendosi  difficil- 
mente  e  perseverando  quasi  mai.  Cosi  fra  quelle 
accennate  nell'Appendice  all'opuscolo  DE  RE 
ANGLICANA  vi  sono  parecchie  che  sono  semplici 
confraternite  e  che  non  hanno  affatto  la  vita  reli- 
giosa.  Se  si  sommassero  tutti  questi  uomini  datisi 
allo  stato  religiose,  non  sono  piu  di  100  ;  e  tanto 
ci  viene  assicurato  da  persone  convertite  alia  fede 
e  che  hanno  bene  conosciuto  queste  societa.  Fra 
i  cosi  detti  religiosi  vi  sono  pero  parecchi  sinceri 
e  di  molto  zelo  ai  quali  di  gran  cuore  auguriamo  il 
lume  della  vera  fede. 


IL    "  DOPPIO    NEMICO    DELI/ANGLICANISMO." 

"CUM  DUOBUS  HOSTIBUS  DIMICATUM  est : '  cum 
civili  potestate  quae  Ecclesiam  in  vinculis  comprimere  voluit ;  cum 
partibus  Puritanis  quae  renovationi  Catholics;  strenuissime  se  oppone- 
bant.  Partes  Puritance  victae  sunt,  nee  tamen  evanuerunt"  (p.  8, 
verso  la  meta). 

Qui  e  necessario  notare  che  il  nome  di  Puritani 
si  usa  per  significare  tutti  gli  Anglicani  del  vecchio 
tipo  e  che  sono  ostili  ai  Ritualisti  ed  al  Neo-Angli- 
canismo  dei  Trattariani.  Questi  del  resto  costi- 
tuiscono  la  maggioranza  del  clero  e  del  popolo 
inglese.  I  Puritani  non  costituiscono  una  setta 
separata :  sono  Anglicani  protestanti  e  ugualmente 
membri  della  chiesa  Anglicana  alia  pari  dei  Ritualisti; 
anzi  si  possono  dire  con  piu  verita  membri  di  questa 

1  Questa  espressione  e  comunissimafra  gli  Anglicani  in  Inghilterra 
e  si  ripete  in  tutte  le  prediche  e  in  tutti  i  giornali.  Ma  i  due  nemici 
della  chiesa  Anglicana  qui  accennati  sono  i  Puritani  ed  i  Romanisti; 
perche  chiamano  Romanisti  noi  cattolici  a  motivo  della  nostra  ob- 
bedienza  al  Romano  Pontefice.  Ma  1'Autore  Anglicano  scrivendo  in 
Roma  preferisce  in  modo  di  parlare  meglio  adattato  alle  circostanze. 


"DE   RE   ANGLIC  AN  A"   AND   ITS  CRITICS     227 

Chiesa,  perche  ne  formano  la  parte  principale  e  con- 
servano  fedelmente  il  vero  Anglicanismo  dei  primi 
tre  secoli.  I  Ritualisti  li  disprezzano,  specialmente 
trovandosi  a  Roma,  ma  sono  in  perfetta  communione 
con  essi.  Cosi  p.  es.  Lord  Halifax,  che  si  puo 
chiamare  Capo  e  Protettore  dei  Ritualisti,  ed  il 
Vescovo  Anglicano  di  Liverpool,  che  ritiene  il  Papa 
per  Anticristo,  communicano  amichevolmente  in 
sacris  come  membri  della  medesima  chiesa. 

E  temeraria  1'asserzione  che  i  Puritani  sono 
sopraffatti.  Non  si  vince  cosi  facilmente  la  maggior- 
anza  del  popolo  inglese.  Si  tollera  il  Ritualismo, 
perche  Findirferenza  religiosa  ed  il  liberalismo  rifugge 
dai  mezzi  coercitivi ;  ma  da  cio  male  si  potrebbe 
dedurre  la  conclusione  che  il  Ritualismo  avra  mai  la 
preponderanza  religiosa  in  Inghilterra.  Al  contrario 
trae  seco  una  parte  ben  piccola  del  populo.1 


DEI    VESCOVI    ANGLICANI. 

"  Episcopi  quatuor  vel  quinque  eo  intendunt.  Ceteri  sententia 
Catholici  sunt." 

i°  L'asserzione  e  assolutamente  erronea.  In 
fatti  si  enumerano  qui  quattro  o  cinque  Vescovi  che 
sono  Puritani  e  che  si  oppongono  piu  energicamente 
ai  Ritualisti.  Sono  i  Vescovi  di  Liverpool,  di 
Worcester,  Exeter,  e  Sodor.  Ma  moltissimi  altri 
Vescovi  Anglicani  mentre  mostrarsi  piu  tolleranti 
non  approvano  affatto  il  Ritualismo. 

2°  Gli  altri,  "  ceteri"  non  si  possono  affatto 
chiamare  cattolici.  Perche  prendendo  anche  il  nome 

1  L'Arcidiacono  di  Londra,  W.  Sinclair,  ha  potuto  asserire  recente- 
mente  che  il  numero  dei  Ritualisti  in  Inghilterra  non  supera  i  35,000, 
ossia  i  sopra  430  Inglesi. 


228     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

di  cattolico  nel  senso  dei  Ritualist!,  ossia  per  signifi- 
care  chiunque  creda  al  sacerdozio,  al  sacrifizio  della 
messa  ed  alia  presenza  reale,  si  potra  citare  appena 
uno  fra  i  Vescovi  Anglicani  che  ammetta  questi 
dommi.  Come  mai  dunque  chiamarli  "  sententia 
catholici"^.  Tre  solamente  fra  40  Vescovi  mostrano 
qualche  favore  per  le  dottrine  dei  Ritualist!  e  sono 
il  Vescovo  di  Lincoln,  1'Arc.  di  York  ed  il  Vescovo 
di  Salisbury. 

Ma  anche  questi  tre  negano  il  domma  della 
transustanziazione.  Concedono  il  sacrifizio  della 
messa  nel  senso  commemorative.  Inseo-nano  la 

o 

presenza  reale  dell'Eucaristia  nel  senso  luterano, 
supponendo  che  rimanga  la  materia  del  pane  e  del 
vino  e  proponendo  con  espressioni  eretiche  una 
presenza  spirituale  che  male  si  puo  defmire.  Las- 
ciamo  ad  altri  il  determinare  se  questi  posson 
chiamarsi  cattolici.1 

1  In  quanto  agli  altri  punti  tutti  rigettano  unanimemente  la  dottrina 
cattolica  sulla  costituzione  della  Chiesa  e  del  Romano  Pontefice.  II 
vescovo  di  Lincoln,  Primicerio  fra  i  Ritualisti,  ha  voluto  recentemente 
esprimere  pnbblicamenle  la  sua  sentenza  colle  parole  del  disgraziato 
Dollinger  che  Pautorita  del  Romano  Pontefice  non  si  potra  mai  con- 
ciliare  colla  Sacra  Scrittura  e  col  dovere  civile.  Fra  quelli  poi  che 
rigettano  1'autorita  del  Romano  Pontefice  come  contraria  al  Verbo 
Incarnato,  all'insegnamento  dei  Padri  ed  alia  storia  della  Chiesa 
occupa  facilmente  il  primo  posto  1'Arcivescovo  di  York.  (V.  il  suo 
discorso  al  congresso  ecclesiastico  del  1895.)  Finalmente  e  tanto  vero 
che  il  Vescovo  di  Salisbury  non  favorisce  il  cattolicismo  che  rigetta 
la  giurisdizione  del  Romano  Pontefice  ne'  suoi  scritti  e  ne'  suoidiscorsi. 
Ogni  anno  poi  offre  il  suo  appoggio  alia  Societk  fondata  per  propagare 
il  protestantesimo  in  Italia  sotto  la  direzione  del  Conte  Campello,  della 
qual  societa  e  riconosciuto  Patrono. 


"DE  RE  ANGLICANA"  AND  ITS  CRITICS     229 


PROCESSO  DEL  VESCOVO  DI  LINCOLN  ED  APPELLO 
DELL'ANGLICANISMO  ALLA  CORONA 

"  Contra  excessus  potestatis  civilis  dimicantes  veram  potius  quam 
speciosam  victoriam  ita  rettulimus,  ut  libertate  maiore  quam  quae 
appareat  utamur.  .  .  .  Processu  contra  Episcopum  Lincolniensem  de 
eisdem  rebus  institute,  Archiepiscopus  Cantuariensis,  edictis  civilium 
tribunalium  neglectis,  rem  PROPRIA  sua  auctoritate  in  sensu  CA- 
THOLICO  determinavit"  (p.  9.,  in  princip.)- 

i°  Una  resistenza  al  potere  civile  o  qualsiasi 
opposizione  per  parte  dei  vescovi  Anglicani  e  cosa 
inaudita.  Sono  creati  dal  potere  civile  ed  obbedis- 
cono  sommessamente  al  loro  creatore.  Tutto  cio 
che  si  dice  qui  di  resistenza  e  carcere,  si  riduce 
a  cinque  o  sei  Ritualisti  del  clero  inferiore. 

2°  II  potere  civile  tiene  oggi  il  governo  supremo 
della  Chiesa  non  meno  che  pel  passato.  Nessun 
vescovo  puo  essere  consecrate  senza  il  consenso  ed 
il  mandate  della  Regina.  II  vescovo  novellamente 
consecrate  presta  in  ginocchio  giuramento  nelle 
mani  della  Regina,  dichiarando  di  ricevere  da  essa 
soltanto  OGNI  GIURISDIZIONE  PER  LE 
COSE  SPIRITUALI.  II  potere  civile  costituisce 
o  divide  le  diocesi  e  le  parocchie,  e  coll'autorita 
della  Regina  si  sottopongono  le  anime  da  una  ad 
un'altra  giurisdizione.  La  licenza  della  Corona  e 
necessaria  per  convocare  un  sinodo.  Un  Arcives- 
covo  od  un  Vescovo  non  puo  pubblicare  una  legge 
senza  previa  approvazione  della  Regina.  Non  si 
puo  cambiare  una  parolla  della  Liturgia  senza  il 
permesso  del  potere  civile  e  del  Parlamento. 
Questa  supremazia  della  Corona  e  in  pieno  suo 
vigore,  come  lo  ha  dichiarato  ingenuamente  pochi 
niesi  or  sono  il  principale  giornale  Anglicano  "IL 


236     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

GUARDIAN."  Del  resto  cio  e  ammesso  e 
difeso  strenuamente  dai  vescovi  Anglican!,  e 

O 

citano  1'esempio  di  Costantino  e  degli  impera- 
tori  orientali.  E  vana  la  speranza  che  il  popolo 
inglese  alleggerisca  questo  giogo,  chef  lo  aggra- 
vierebbe  maggiormente. 

3°  II  processo  del  Vescovo  di  Lincoln  ci  da  un 
argomento  di  questa  servitu.  E  falso  che  1'Arcives- 
covo  di  Canterbury  abbia  dato  la  sentenza  di  sua 
propria  autorita.  L'Arcivescovo  invece  dichiaro 
pubblicamente  nel  processo,  che  non  1'avrebbe 
neanche  cominciato  se  il  potere  civile,  per  mezzo 
del  consiglio  privato  della  Regina,  non  1'avesse 
assicurato  della  sua  giurisdizione  e  promesso  di 
confermare  la  sentenza.  Altrimenti  eodi  sarebbesi 

o 

astenuto  da  ogni  atto  giuridico. 

4°  Ma  vi  e  un  errore  piii  grave  ancora  in  asserire 
che  1'Arcivescovo  sentenzio  in  senso  cattolico.  Al 
contrario  1'Arcivescovo  pronunzio  la  sentenza  in 
senso  assolutamente  protestante  e  secondo  il  prin- 
cipio  fondamentale  dei  Riformatori.  Perche  di- 
chiaro che  il  Vescovo  di  Lincoln  celebrando  1'Euca- 
ristia  dovesse  contenersi  in  maniera  che  tutti  potes- 
sero  ben  vedere  ogni  suo  atto  alia  Mensa,  e  cio  per 
mantenere  espressamente  il  principio  fondamentale 
di  Lutero,  di  Calvino  e  di  Cranmer  che  i  sacramenti 
conferiscono  la  grazia  non  ex  opere  operate,  ma  come 
segni  esterni  della  passione  che  eccitano  la  fede  nel 
cuore  degli  astanti.  Ouindi  nel  processo  medesimo 
1'Arcivescovo  protesto  che  la  sua  sentenza  in  questa 
materia  era  assolutamente  conforme  ai  principii  della 
Riforma  protestante.  Per  conseguenza  non  sen- 
tenzio ne  di  sua  propria  autorita  ne  in  senso  catto- 
lico. 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"   AND   ITS  CRITICS     231 

NUMERO   DEGLI   ANGLICANI 

Nell'elenco  dato  dall'Autore  si  asserisce  che  gli 
Anglicani  hanno : 

2  provincie  ecclesiastiche  in  Inghil- 
terra^ cd  altrove        .         .         .12 
35  diocesi  in  Inghilterra,  ed  altrove     165 

Questa  statistica  puo  facilmente  ingannare  chi 
non  conosce  il  vero  stato  e  numero  degli  Anglicani. 
Si  deve  sapere  che  il  numero  degli  Anglicani  in 
Inghilterra  ed  altrove  non  supera  i  25000000,  di 
quali  1 6  in  Inghilterra,  7  nell'  impero  Britannico, 
oltre  2  milioni  circa  negli  Stati  Uniti.  Cosi  per 
16  milioni  in  Inghilterra  hanno  35  Diocesi,  e  per 
9  milioni  altrove  ne  hanno  H5-1  Cosi  il  numero 
dei  Vescovi  supera  la  proporzione  del  popolo.  Si 
deve  notare  inoltre  che  I'Anglicanismo  non  e  affatto 
la  religione  dominante  nell'impero  Britannico.  In 
Inghilterra  non  conta  guari  piu  della  meta  del 
popolo.  In  Iscozia,  in  Irlanda,  nel  Canada,  in  Aus- 
tralia e  nelle  Indie  la  minoranza  solamente  appar- 
tiene  alia  setta  Anglicana.  Negli  Stati  Uniti  poi  e 
una  minoranza  ben  piccola  e  non  supera  la  quinta 
parte  dei  cattolici.  Quindi  non  si  potrebbe  con- 
cepire  illusione  maggiore  che  quella  di  supporre  che 
il  ritorno  della  nazione  Inglese  e  delle  altre  nazioni 
dell'  impero  alia  fede,  dipenda  solamente  o  neanche 
principalmente  da  una  qualche  unione  in  massa 
degli  Anglicani. 

Questi  sono  alcuni  degli  errori  che  abbondano 
nell'  opuscolo. 

1  I  dissident!  poi  usciti  dal  seno  della  Chiesa  per  legge  stabilita  e 
divisi  in  piu  di  250  sette,  contano  12000000  di  seguaci. 


232     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

PARTE  SECONDA 
BELLA  SPERANZA  DI   UNA  RIUNIONE 

"  Hinc  novus  animorum  motus,  qui  tamen  non  novus  sed  renovatus. 
Quaestionem  de  Ordinationibus  Anglicanis  iniimus,  non  quidem  in  ea 
totum  dissensionis  radicem  contineri  putantes,  sed  in  eo  confisi  quod 
hinc  via  ad  animos  conciliandos  pateat.  Proinde  nostri  huic  multum 
istant :  ordinem  suorum  et  sacramentorum  veritatem  summa  fiducia 
tenant  et  studio  singular!  defendunt.  Qui  de  his  dubitaverit,  quomodo 
cum  eo  communionis  vel  voluntatem  concipere  polerunt  f  "  (p  12). 

DELL'  INTENZIONE  DEGLI  ANGLICANI 

Nell'  ultima  frase  qui  sopra  si  rivela  la  mente 
degli  Anglicani.  Cercano  essi  veramente  la  verita 
e  1'  unione  ?  Se  davvero  lo  desiderano,  come  mai 
non  possono  neanche  concepire  un  desiderio  di 
communione  con  Roma,  senza  la  previa  ricognizione 
dei  loro  ordini  ?  Chi  cerca  con  animo  sincero  il 
regno  di  Dio,  la  prima  domanda  che  si  fa  e  questa  : 
Che  cosa  debbo  fare  per  salvarmi  ?  Cristo  ha 
veramente  istituito  una  sola  e  vera  Chiesa,  area  di 
salute  ?  Questa  Chiesa  e  proprio  quella  governata 
dai  successori  di  Pietro  ?  fi  necessario  per  la  salute 
eterna  sottomettersi  al  Romano  Pontefice  ?  Questo 
sono  le  questioni  che  spontaneamente  sorgono  nella 
mente  degli  Anglicani  sinceri,  le  quali  sono  modifi- 
cate  dalla  validita  o  nullita  degli  Ordini  Anglicani. 
Gli  altri  poi  non  si  curano  di  prendere  in  considera- 
zione  questi  dubbi,  parlando  di  unione,  senza  il 
patto  che  la  validita  degli  ordini  loro  sia  dalla 
S.  Sede  ammessa.  Parlando  cosi  non  apparisce 
chiaro  che  sono  spinti  da  altri  motivi  ?  Quali  sono 
essi  ? 


"DE   RE  ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS  CRITICS     233 

A  tutti  noi  che  viviamo  in  Inghilterra  e  cono- 
sciamo  la  situazione  religiosa,  questi  motivi  sono 
manifest! ;  ne  daremo  una  breve  exposizione. 

i°  Fino  all'  anno  1830  non  vi  era  in  Inghilterra 
che  la  Vecchia  Scuola  dell'  Anglicanismo.  Questa 
non  desiderava  altro  che  una  chiesa  insulare,  nazio- 
nale  ed  al  tutto  conforme  alle  dottrine  della  Riforma. 
Non  cercava  ne  si  curava  delle  pratiche  e  delle  dot- 
trine  estranee,  mentre  poi  in  Inghilterra  combatteva 
strenuamente  i  dommi  cattolici.  Anche  ai  nostri 
giorni  la  maggioranza  del  popolo  prende  questo 
atteggiamento. 

2°  Dopo  il  1830  sorse  il  Puseismo  o  Neoanglican- 
ismo  introdotto  dai  Trattariani  e  dai  Ritualisti. 
Questi  animati  da  spirito  assai  diverse  e  da  altre 
intenzioni,  cambiarono  in  molte  cose  1'  aspetto  e  lo 
scopo  dell'  Anglicanismo.  Fra  di  essi  un  buon 
numero  di  dotti  e  sinceri,  leggendo  le  opere  de'  SS. 
Padri  e  viaggiando  in  paesi  cattolici  giunsero  a 
riconoscere  la  bellezza,  la  dignita,  1'antichita,  e  la 
verita  di  molti  dommi  e  pratiche  della  chiesa 
cattolica.  Non  volevano  tuttavia  sottomettersi  al 
Romano  Pontefice,  ne  abbandonare  la  Chiesa 
Anglicana. 

3°  In  conseguenza  di  cio  seguirono  altre  vie; 
cercarono  di  rinnovare  a  poco  a  poco  il  culto  e  le  dot- 
trine  della  chiesa  Anglicana  a  somiglianza  della 
chiesa  di  oriente  e  di  occidente ;  mantenendo  pero 
sempre  immutata  la  loro  indipendenza  dalla  Sede 
Romana,  i  loro  diritti  e  la  loro  liberta  ottenuta  per 
mezzo  della  Riforma,  e  rigettando  come  una  usurpa- 
zione  la  giurisdizione  del  Romano  Pontefice.  A  questo 
scopo  non  si  stancavano  di  proclamare,  come  fanno 
tuttora,  che  la  Chiesa  Anglicana  e  un  ramo  della 


234     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

chiesa  cattolica  e  che  fa  parte  vera  ed  integrale 
della  chiesa  di  Cristo  e  che  si  identifica  con  quella 
degli  Apostoli.  Quindi  tanti  sforzi  per  arrogarsi 
tutto  cio  che  trovano  nella  chiesa  cattolica  in 
materia  di  culto,  di  pratiche  e  mezzi  di  divozione,  di 
parati  sacri  e  dell'  ornamentazione  delle  chiese.  In 
questo  modo  hanno  potuto  ingannare  il  popolo  e 
trattenere  le  anime  sincere  che  si  avvicinavano  alia 
vera  Chiesa,  dicendo  :  "  Non  vi  e  bisogno  di 
abbandonare  il  nostro  ceto  per  cercare  questo  o 
quello  dai  Romanisti.  Tutte  queste  cose  le  potete 
godere  in  seno  alia  chiesa  Anglicana.  Noi  abbiamo 
tutto  cio  che  hanno  loro  ;  anzi  da  noi  potrete  avere 
quanto  credete  trovare  nella  chiesa  Papistica  e 
meglio  ancora,  eccezione  fatta  della  giurisdizione 
papale,  che  e  una  usurpazione  e  fonte  detestabila 
di  novita  e  di  superstizione." 

4°  Questa  nuova  situazione  vien  ben  delineata 
colle  parole  recenti  di  un  vescovo  cattolico  d'lnghil- 
terra.  "  Dal  tempo  della  Riforma  il  Demonio  ha 
combattuto  costantemente  per  mezzo  dell'eresia  la 
fede  cattolica  in  Inghilterra,  LA  OSTEGGIO  APERTA- 
MENTE  E  VIOLENTEMENTE.  Non  avendo  ottenuto 
un  pieno  intento  ha  mutato  da  quell'anno  in  poi  la 
sua  tattica,  e  combatte  la  Chiesa  cattolica  IMITAN- 
DOLA  ed  usando  contro  di  essa  un  travisamento  delle 
sue  dottrine,  ed  usurpando  le  sue  pratiche  trascina 
le  anime  semplici.  Questa  tattica  e  piu  temibile 
dell'altra,  benche  colla  grazia  di  Dio  speriamo  di 
sventarla." 

5°  In  questi  ultimi  tempi  il  Neoanglicanismo 
o  Ritualismo  che  piu  che  mai  e  con  ogni  studio 
vuole  arrogarsi  il  nome  di  cattolicismo,  fa  ogni 
sforzo  per  escludere  dall' Inghilterra  la  cosi  detta 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"  AND  ITS   CRITICS     235 

usurpazione  del  Romano  Pontefice.1  Oggi  si  ha 
la  speranza  e  1'ambizione,  mille  volte  espressa  dagli 
Anglicani  nei  loro  scritti  e  nelle  loro  prediche, 
di  estendere  in  tal  modo  la  chiesa  Anglicana  nell' 
impero  Britannico,  rappresentandola  come  parte 
integrale  della  Chiesa  cattolica,  che  possa  addivenire 
1'emula  della  chiesa  Greca  e  Romana  ;  anzi  di  esse 
piu  pura,  piu  ricca  e  piu  dotta. 

In  questa  guisa  la  Chiesa  anglicana  rimarra  libera 
ed  indipendente,  conservera  in  pace  tutti  i  diritti 
conquistati  dalla  Riforma  colle  sue  molteplici  eresie, 
e  senza  sottomettersi  all'obbedienza  del  Romano 
Pontefice,  avra  agli  occhi  di  tutti  la  gloria  ed  il 
prestigio  del  nome  cattolico.  Fra  quelli  che  va- 
gheggiano  questo  piano  vi  sono  alcuni  che  ammettono 
la  precedenza  o  un  Primato  di  onore  del  Romano 
Pontefice  e  tutto  al  piu  de  jure  ecclesiasiico. 

6°  Chi  non  vede  che  per  riuscire  in  questa  loro 
speranza  ed  ambizione,  e  cosa  essenziale  1'ottenere 
la  ricognizione  degli  ordini  Anglicani  ?  Senza  di 
cio  la  chiesa  orientale  ed  occidentale  non  potra  mai 
ammettere  gli  Anglicani  alia  sua  vera  comunione. 
Ne  hanno  anche  bisogno  per  potere  meglio  combat- 
tere  le  sette  da  loro  dissidenti.  Percio  desiderano 
tanto  ottenere  dalla  S.  Sede  una  qualsiasi  ricog- 
nizione degli  ordini  loro. 

7°  Con  questo  scopo  gli  Anglicani  fanno  conce- 
pire  una  vaga  speranza  di  quella  riunione  tanto 
desiderata  dal  cuore  paterno  del  S.  Padre,  affer- 
mando  che  la  ricognizione  degli  ordini  ne  spianer- 
ebbe  la  via.  Se  questa  concessione,  supponendola 

1  L'Arcivescovo  di  York  (che  e  Anglicano)  in  una  lettera  recentis- 
sima  ha  dichiarato  che  "  LA  CHIESA  ANGLICANA  MENTRE  ADDI- 
VIENE  DI  GlORNO  IN  GlORNO  PIU  CATTOLICA  DlVIENE  IN  PARI 
TEMPO  PIU  ANTIROMANA  E  ANTIPAPALE." 


236     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

possibile,  addivenisse  realta,  gli  Anglican!  certa- 
mente  avrebbero  mille  ragioni  dommatiche  per 
non  unirsi  a  noi.  Cos!  1'Anglicanismo  otterrebbe  il 
suo  intento  e  la  speranza  di  una  unione  in  senso 
cattolico  sarebbe  piu  che  mai  svanita. 

8°  Ma  si  domanda  se  veramente  nella  chiesa 
Anglicana  vi  sia  un  movimento  o  una  disposizione 
negli  animi  per  1'unione  colla  Sede  Romana.  Ris- 
pondiamo :  Se  il  Romano  Pontefice  consentisse  ad 
abrogare  i  decreti  del  concilio  di  Trento  e  Vaticano, 
ovvero  a  spiegarli  in  senso  nuovo  e  non  cattolico ;  o 
se  dichiarasse  che  il  semplice  Primato  di  onore  o 
fondato  "  DE  JURE  ECCLESIASTICO"  basta 
al  suo  ministero,  o  in  altri  termini,  se  il  Pontefice  si 
facesse  Anglicano,  non  vi  e  dubbio  che  molti  fra  i 
Neoanglicani  si  unirebbero  alia  Chiesa  Romana. 
Ma  se  il  Pontefice  Romano  come  custode  infallibile 
della  verita  cattolica  si  rifiuta  a  fare  simili  conces- 
sioni,  eccezione  fatta  di  quelle  anime  sincere,  ogni 
giorno  piu  numerose,  che  entrano  nel  seno  della 
chiesa,  nessuno  fra  i  Vescovi  Anglicani,  pochi  del 
Clero,  e  pochissimi  del  laicato  cercano  1'unione  in 
senso  cattolico.  Questa  e  una  abberrazione  incon- 
cepibile,  dicono  essi,  coH'Arciv.  di  Canterbury. 

9°  Chi  non  vede  che  la  medesima  conclusione  si 
deduce  dalla  lettera  del  celebre  Gladstone  all'Arciv. 
di  York.  In  essa,  benche  compilata  con  una  molti- 
tudine  di  parole,  1'Autore  ha  costantemente  in  pre- 
senza  la  Chiesa  Anglicana  indipendente  come  parte 
uguale  e  integrale  della  Chiesa  di  Cristo  al  pari 
della  Greca  e  della  Romana.  In  vita  il  Romano 
Pontefice  ad  unirsi  a  questa  triplice  federazione, 
perche  queste  tre  Chiese  difendono  contro  gl'infedeli 
i  dommi  della  Trinita,  dell'Incarnazione  e  della  sue- 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS   CRITICS     237 

cessione  apostolica.  Vuol  persuadere  il  Pontefice  a 
riconoscere  una  certa  uguaglianza  fra  queste  Chiese, 
e  per  giungere  a  questo  sogno,  usa  il  linguaggio  di 
una  deferente  adulazione  per  ottenere  la  ricognizione 
degli  ordini  Anglicani.  II  celebre  capo  del  libera- 
lismo  inglese  ha  cercato  di  distruggere  1'opera  del 
Concilio  Vaticano  sotto  Pio  IX,  ed  oggi  sotto  Leone 
XIII  vorrebbe  renderla  affatto  inutile. 

10°  Quindi  possiamo  asserire  che,  lasciando  in 
disparte  le  buone  disposizioni  delle  anime  sincere, 
questo  nuovo  tentativo  non  e  altro  che  un  assalto 
insidioso  contro  la  Chiesa  Romana.  Tutto  il  clero 
e  tutto  il  popolo  cattolico  in  Inghilterra  lo  attesta,  e 
gli  stessi  Inglesi  non  cattolici  non  lo  nascondono. 
Cos!  il  gran  giornale  inglese  il  Times,  che  rappre- 
senta  piu  di  qualunque  altro  la  mente  del  popolo 
inglese,  scriveva  il  i  Giugno  1896  che  se  il  Romano 
Pontefice  annuiva  alle  pretensioni  del  sig.  Gladstone 
ammetterebbe  che  la  chiesa  Anglicana  e  parte  vera 
ed  integrale  della  Chiesa  di  Cristo  e  si  metterebbe 
in  contraddizione  co'suoi  antecessori.  Ecco  le 
parole  del  giornale :  "II  Sig.  Gladstone  non  dice 
che  dobbiamo  riconoscere  il  Papa  come  Capo 
supremo  della  Chiesa.  E  il  Papa  che  asserisce  che 
cio  costituisce  la  prova  "  stantis  aut  cadentis 
ecclesice  "  e  che  egli  ci  accogliera  nell'  ovile  solo  se 
noi  gli  diamo  soddisfazione  in  questo  punto.  Pos- 
siamo essere  sicuri  che  se  il  Papa  e  persuaso  che 
una  sua  ricognizione  degli  Ordini  Anglicani  pre- 
parcra  la  via  ad  una  ricognizione  da  parte  nostra  del 
sue  pretese,  la  via  in  qualche  modo  sara  spianata. 
Ma  se  questa  ricognizione  nostra  non  accade,1  se  il 

1  Ossia  la  ricognizione  del  Romano  Pontefice  come  Capo  Supremo 
della  Chiesa. 


238     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Clero  ed  il  laicato  Anglicano  persiste  nella  sua 
indipendenza  la  ricognizione  degli  Ordini  anglicani 
servira  ad  indebolire piuttosto  che  fortificare  la  posi- 
zione  del  Papa  e  della  sua  Chiesa.  Equivarrebbe  ad 
una  confessione  che  la  chiesa  dlnghilterra  e  ed  e 
sempre  stata  un  ramo  vero  e  vivente  della  Chiesa 
cattolica,  e  che  il  suo  clero  possiede  quei  poteri 
soprannaturaii  che  il  Card.  Vaughan  ha  rivendicato 
come  cosa  esclusivamente  della  Chiesa  sua.  Cib  non 
pub  essere  Cintenzione  del  Papa,  ma  e  quasi  certo, 
che  questa  sarebbe  la  conseguenza.  E  abbastanza 
probabile  che  una  sezione  del  partito  della  Chiesa 
Alta  sarebbe  disposta  ad  accettare  pienamente  le 
proposte  del  Papa.  Ma  una  parte  maggiore  e  piu 
assennata  non  lo  farebbe  affatto.  Tutto  al  piu  una 
ricognizione  degl'  Ordini  Anglicani  per  parte  del 
Papa  servirebbe  a  confennarli  nella  per siiasione  della 
verita  e  della  sicurezza  della  loro  posizione,  lasciendo 
gli  altri  come  sono."  (Times,  i  Giugno  1896.) 

Se  ci  si  domandasse  se  la  situazione  attuale  in 
Inghilterra  ci  da  speranza  di  un  ritorno  al  seno  della 
Chiesa,  rispondiamo  che  questa  speranza  colla  grazia 
di  Dio  e  grande  assai. 

1°  In  tutta  Inghilterra  le  conversioni  sono  nume- 
rose.  Questo  numero  gia  grande  di  convertiti  cres- 
cera  senza  dubbio  facendosi  piu  evidente  che  la  Chiesa 
Cattolica  Romana  e  la  sola  in  Inghilterra  che  abbia 
diritto  alle  prerogative  e  al  nome  di  cattolica. 

2°  II  Neoanglicanismo  o  Ritualismo  benche 
costituisca  una  piccola  minoranza  della  setta  Angli- 
cana  porta  almeno  questo  vantaggio,  che  a  suo 
malgrado  modifica  le  disposizioni  di  alcuni,  e  facendo 
conoscere  alcune  dottrine  e  pratiche  cattoliche  spia- 
nano  la  via  a  molti  per  conoscere  ed  entrare  nella 


"DE  RE  ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS   CRITICS     239 

Chiesa  Cattolica.  In  una  sola  diocesi  si  sono 
convertiti  in  questa  maniera  piu  di  mille  all'anno. 
Siamo  persuasi  che  continuando  quest'opera,  molti 
si  persuaderanno  sempre  piu  della  verita  e  bellezza 
della  fede  cattolica  e  dell'  inutilita  di  cercarla  fuori 
della  Cattedra  di  Pietro.  Si  libereranno  dalle  reti 
del  pseudo-cattolicismo,  e  il  nemico  di  Dio  sara 
respinto  colle  sue  stesse  armi. 

CONCLUSIONE 

i°  Da  tutto  cio  si  deduce  che  la  Chiesa  Cattolica 
in  Inghilterra  trova  indirettamente  un  considerevole 
aiuto  nell'opera  dei  Ritualisti  in  quanto  che  aiutano 
e  dispongono  meglio  1'animo  degl'Inglesi,  e  cio  da 
buone  speranze  di  messe  piu  abbondante. 

2°  Per  raggiungere  questo  fine  salvando  la  verita 
e  la  giustizia,  e  assolutamente  necessario  astenersi  da 
tutto  cioche  puo  dare  anche  apparentemente  appro  - 
vazione  e  forza  alia  setta  pseudo-cattolica>  o  che 
possa  confermare  in  qualsiasi  modo  la  sua  autorita. 
Altrimenti  non  solo  verra  offuscata  la  verita 
dommatica  e  storica,  ma  il  popolo  inglese  sara 
ingannato  riguardo  alia  vera  Chiesa  Cattolica,  e  il 
ritorno  dell' Inghilterra  alia  fede  diventera  impos- 
sibile  o  sara  ritardato  indefinitivamente. 

Questa  e  la  nostra  testimonianza  sulla  situazione 
della  Chiesa  nella  nostra  patria  e  coscenziosamente 
la  diamo  per  amore  di  Cristo,  sottomettendola  umil- 
mente  alia  considerazione  del  suo  Vicario  in  terra. 

Roma,  Festa  di  S,  Guglielmo  Arciv.  di  York 
8  Giugno  1896. 

J.  C.co  MOVES,  S.T.D. 

F.  A.  GASQUET,  O.S.B.,  S.T.D. 


240     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

III 

THE    RISPOSTA    EXAMINED 

(From  the  Guardian  of  October  yth,  1896) 

READERS  of  the  Guardian  have  no  doubt 
been  interested  in  the  translation  of  the  extra- 
ordinary memoir  presented  to  the  Holy  Office  by 
Dom  Gasquet  and  Canon  Moves.1  I  am  told  that 
some  would  be  further  interested  in  an  account  of 
the  "opuscolo"  entitled De  Re  Anglicana,  to  which  it 
was  a  reply. 

When  Father  Puller  and  I  were  in  Rome  last 
May  we  were  urged  by  some  friends  to  write  a  brief 
account  of  the  present  state  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  especially  of  the  nature  of  the  parties 
within  the  Church  which  trace  their  origin  to  the 
fierce  controversies  of  the  Reformation  period.  We 
were  very  unwilling  to  do  this.  It  was  difficult — 
nay,  impossible — to  write  impartially ;  it  was  dis- 
tasteful to  write  anything  like  a  panegyric  upon 
ourselves.  Yet  there  seemed  to  be  a  need  of 
something.  One  of  the  Cardinals  to  whom  the 
question  of  the  English  ordinations  was  to  be  sub- 
mitted frankly  admitted  that  he  knew  nothing 
whatever  about  the  English  Church,  and  would 
welcome  information.  "There  are  plenty  of  men," 
we  were  told,  "  ready  to  say  all  that  can  be  said 

1  A  fragmentary  translation  of  the  First  Part,  and  a  more  con- 
tinuous version  of  the  Second  Part,  had  appeared  in  the  preceding 
number  of  the  Guardian.  I  understand  that  a  complete  translation, 
both  of  De  Re  Anglicana  and  of  the  Risposta,  was  afterwards 
published  in  the  Tablet. 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"  AND  ITS  CRITICS      241 

against  you ;  there  are  none  to  present  the  other 
aspect  of  the  case  unless  you  do  it  yourselves." 

We  yielded  to  these  instances,  and  wrote  a  brief 
pamphlet.  I  was  alone  responsible  for  the  form 
of  it,  but  I  think  I  may  say  that  Father  Puller 
concurred  in  all  that  was  said ;  the  better  part  of 
the  matter,  indeed,  was  supplied  by  his  unrivalled 
knowledge  of  the  facts.  The  statement  was  obvi- 
ously an  ex parte  one ;  it  pretended  to  be  nothing 
else.  But  I  am  not  afraid  to  claim  that  it  was  com- 
posed with  careful  moderation  and  candid  truthful- 
ness. It  was  not  published ;  it  was  printed  for 
private  circulation,  and  it  consisted  of  matter  so 
familiar  to  every  instructed  Englishman  that  there 
would  be  no  point  in  circulating  it  in  England.  But 
it  has  been  so  savagely  attacked  as  untruthful  and 
treacherous  that  some  people  may  be  interested  to 
see  what  it  contains,  and  as  there  are  some  few 
copies  in  hand  I  have  sent  them  to  the  British 
Museum,  to  Sion  College,  to  the  University 
Libraries,  and  at  this  conjuncture  to  the  reception- 
room  of  the  Church  Congress,  where  anyone  who 
cares  to  do  so  may  consult  them. 

The  method  of  the  Risposta  was  to  print  succes- 
sive extracts  from  the  pamphlet,  and  to  append  a 
reply.  I  give  a  few  specimens  of  these  replies. 

Speaking  of  the  state  of  religion  under  Henry  VIII, 
I  had  said  : — 

"  Nee  tamen  etiam  tune  deerant  qui  novas  res  in 
hac  parte  molirentur,  inter  quos  et  episcopi  rari 
erant,  quorum  princeps  Cranmer." 

Commenting  on  the  word  rari,  my  critics  reply : — 
"  There  were,  on  the  contrary,  many  :  Cranmer 


242     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

(of  Canterbury),  Holbeach  (of  Lincoln),  Goodrich 
(of  Ely),  Ridley  (of  Rochester),  Barlow  (of  Men- 
evia),  and  Shaxton  (of  Salisbury),  all  well-known 
reformers." 

Thus,  in  order  to  combat  my  statement,  they 
include  among  the  well-known  reformers  Goodrich 
and  that  poor  time-server,  Shaxton,  who  both  con- 
formed without  hesitation  under  Mary,  and  Ridley, 
who  was  not  raised  to  the  episcopate  until  six 
months  after  Henry's  death. 

Under  Edward  VI,  I  said,  many  partisans  of  the 
foreign  Reformation  were  promoted  to  places  in  the 
Church  : — 

"Attamen  episcopi,  qui  animo  et  sententia  Catholici 
erant,  sedes  suas  retinuerunt,novisque  rebus  quantum 
possent  sese  accommodarunt.  Nonnulli  autem  ex 
his  detrusi  sunt,  nee  dubium  est  partes  novatorum 
in  reformationem  ulteriorem  atque  exitiabilem  pro- 
gressuras  fuisse,  nisi  prae  morte  Eduardi  immatura 
tanta  consilia  subito  collapsa  essent." 

That   is    surely    a   sufficiently   guarded   statement. 
Now  for  the  reply  : — 

"In  no  way  could  those  who  retained  their  sees 
under  Edward  be  called  Catholic." 

The  comment  on  the  word  nonnulli  is  : — 

"  On  the  contrary,  all  the  Bishops  who  in  some 
way  retained  a  Catholic  feeling  or  a  remnant  of 
veneration  for  the  Catholic  dogmas  were  driven 
from  their  sees  under  Edward.  Thus  Gardiner  (of 
Winchester),  Bonner  (of  London),  Heath  (of  Wor- 
cester), Tunstall  (of  Durham),  Voysey  (of  Exeter), 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"   AND   ITS  CRITICS     243 

Day  (of  Chichester)  were  all  deprived,  many  were 
imprisoned,  and  in  their  places  well-known  hereticks 
were  substituted.  In  this  way  Cranmer  and  the 
fautors  of  his  heresy  easily  obtained  the  pre- 
ponderance." 

Thus  history  is  written  in  the  latitude  of  Rome. 
Would  either  author  have  put  his  name  to  such 
statements  if  intended  for  circulation  in  England  ? 
The  Bishops  who  retained  their  sees  under  Edward 
can  in  no  way,  they  say,  be  called  Catholics.  Yet 
of  these  Goodrich,  Sampson,  Kitchin,  Thirlby,  King, 
Chambers,  Salcot,  Wharton,  and  Aldrich,  who  held 
their  sees  and  administered  their  dioceses  through- 
out Edward's  reign,  continued  to  do  so  without 
question  under  Mary.  Of  these,  moreover,  Wharton 
was  at  once  promoted  to  another  see,  and  Thirlby 
was  chosen  as  the  most  suitable  ecclesiastic  for 
ambassador  to  the  Papal  Court.  Such  are  the  men 
who  are  described  as  having  retained  no  trace  of 
Catholic  sentiment  or  of  respect  for  Catholic 
dogmas. 

Another  subtle  touch  in  the  description  may  be 
noted.  Six  Bishops  are  named  as  having  been 
deprived  under  Edward ;  they  are  mentioned  as 
examples,  and  we  are  further  told  that  "  many  were 
imprisoned."  Would  any  one  suppose  from  this 
account  that  these  six  were  the  only  Bishops  in  any 
way  disturbed  by  the  Government  of  Edward  VI, 
and  that  only  five  of  them  were  imprisoned  ?  What 
meaning  could  the  writers  intend  to  convey  but 
that  a  clean  sweep  was  made  of  a  large  number  of 
Catholic-minded  Bishops,  into  whose  place  numerous 
ardent  reformers  were  promoted  ? 


244     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

In  the  same  vein  they  reply  to  my  next  sentence 
— "Maria  igitur  regnum  excipiente  nonnulli  Episcopi 
destituti  sunt,  inter  quos  Cranmer ;  ceteri  mane- 
bant."  They  complain  of  the  words  nonnulli  and 
ceteri,  I  will  at  once  admit  that  the  word  nonnulli 
was  not  well  chosen,  and  might  be  misleading,  since 
out  of  the  twenty-three  Bishops  then  holding  sees 
thirteen,  or  a  clear  majority,  were  removed.  It  is 
hard  to  see  why  the  word  ceteri  should  be  attacked, 
since  whether  many  or  few  were  deprived,  it  is  still 
true  that  the  rest  remained.  But  I  would  observe 
that  these  critics,  who  are  severe  on  me  for  describ- 
ing thirteen  as  nonnulli,  had  themselves,  immediately 
before,  described  the  five  Bishops  imprisoned  under 
Edward  as  many.  They  then  proceed  to  wrap  up 
and  disguise  the  inconvenient  fact  that  the  rest  con- 
tinued unchallenged  in  their  sees  : — 

"  Those  who  had  been  deprived  under  Edward 
were  restored,  that  is  six.  Six  others  were  re- 
habilitated after  doing  penance  and  abjuring  before 
the  Cardinal  Legate.  The  new  Bishops  constituted 
by  the  Legate  were  fourteen." 

Does  this  accurately  convey  the  fact  that  all  the 
twelve  first  spoken  of  were  reconciled  and  rehabili- 
tated by  the  Legate  in  exactly  the  same  way,  that 
three  more — Goodrich,  Sampson,  and  Chambers — 
went  on  unchallenged  under  Mary,  though  they  died 
before  the  reconciliation  with  Rome  was  complete, 
and  that  another — Kitchin — went  on  all  through 
Mary's  reign  apparently  without  any  formal  re- 
habilitation ? 

These  statements  are  ingeniously  made ;  they 
deal  with  trivial  details,  and  they  cannot  be  checked 


"DE  RE   ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS   CRITICS     245 

unless  by  one  who  is  familiar  with  the  history  of 
the  time  and  armed  with  the  necessary  lists.  Why 
were  they  made  in  this  fashion  ?  Was  it  pure 
ignorance  or  blundering  ?  Possibly  Canon  Moyes 
might  have  been  capable  of  that.  But  Dom  Gas- 
quet  is  the  author  of  a  book  upon  the  period 
which  is  conspicuously  careful  and  accurate.  In  his 
Edward  I' I  and  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  he  has 
Irequent  occasion  to  speak  of  these  various  Bishops 
and  to  distinguish  their  various  attitudes.  He  re- 
cognizes the  influence  of  what  he  calls  the  Catholic 
party  among  the  Bishops,  and  the  power  they  had 
of  checking  and  delaying  the  policy  of  Cranmer. 
Why  does  he  in  this  Risposta  tell  so  different  a 
tale? 

An  explanation  at  once  suggests  itself.  During 
the  controversy  about  the  Edwardine  Ordinal  great 
stress  has  been  laid  upon  the  fact  that  it  was  brought 
into  use  by  the  authority  of  Bishops  who  did  not 
by  any  means  belong  to  Cranmer's  school.  The 
effect  of  this  argument  had  to  be  removed,  or  it 
would  be  impossible  to  condemn  the  Ordinal  on  the 
score  of  intention.  Therefore  a  false  colour  must 
be  spread  over  the  history  of  the  time.  The 
Edwardine  Bishops  must  be  represented  as  one 
and  all  ardent  reformers.  The  accession  of  Mary 
must  be  shown  as  making  a  clean  sweep  of  them 
all.  It  was  no  doubt  safe  to  do  this  in  the  strict 
privacy  of  the  Holy  Office  at  Rome.  I  ask  again, 
would  either  writer  have  put  his  name  to  such 
statements  for  public  circulation  in  England  ? 

They  continue  with  some  bold  denials  of  fact.  I 
said  that  Elizabeth  on  her  accession,  "  Consiliarios 
qui  sub  Maria  rempublicam  direxerant  plerumque 


246     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

retinuit :  attamen  res  novas  cautius  movebat."  My 
critics  fasten  on  the  vtordfl/erumyue  and  say,  "  Here 
we  have  an  erroneous  assertion."  They  are  great 
on  adverbs  and  adjectives  of  quantity.  In  this 
case  I  might  have  given  figures.  Elizabeth  re- 
tained eleven  of  the  members  of  Mary's  Council, 
the  total  number,  I  believe,  being  seventeen  or 
eighteen.  Is  this  majority  improperly  described  by 
the  word  plerumque  ?  The  critics  fired  off  a  charge 
of  falsehood — that  is  easily  done  when  no  reply  is 
expected — but  they  were  too  prudent  to  quote 
figures  in  their  support. 

It  was  necessary  again  to  accentuate  the  change 
made  by  the  new  reign.  So  we  are  told  that 
Elizabeth  and  her  advisers  "were  not  content  with 
restoring  the  reformed  religion  as  it  was  introduced 
under  Edward  VI,  when  at  least  a  remnant  of 
Catholic  belief  was  retained."  This  is  very  wanton- 
ness of  argument.  We  have  just  been  told  that 
not  a  single  Bishop  who  retained  his  see  under 
Edward  had  the  least  tincture  of  Catholic  feeling, 
or  the  smallest  remnant  of  veneration  for  Catholic 
dogmas.  That  was  said  when  the  business  was  to 
depress  the  Edwardine  times.  But  now  the  settle- 
ment of  Elizabeth  is  to  be  blackened ;  and  so,  to 
deepen  the  shadow,  it  is  compared  with  the  less 
gloomy  time  of  Edward,  when  some  remnant  of 
Catholic  belief  was  retained. 

I  made  the  familiar  statement  that  after  the  issue 
of  the  Bull  of  Excommunication  in  1570,  "  Ei  qui 
auctoritati  Pontificiae  maxime  faverent  ab  hac 
Ecclesiae  Anglicanae  unitate  recesserunt."  To 
this  it  is  replied  that  even  before  1570  all  the 
"  Catholics  "  in  England  had  "  suffered  the  loss  of 


"RE   RE  ANGLICANA"  AND   ITS  CRITICS     247 

their  goods  and  preferred  imprisonment  rather  than 
be  present,  even  materially,  at  the  Anglican  rite." 
Then,  with  an  appeal  to  "our  archives,"  we  are 
told  that  the  fines  for  recusancy  amounted  to  a 
million  sterling ;  that  is,  be  it  noted,  before  the 
year  1570.  These  writers  are  probably  acquainted 
with  Parson  and  his  Reasons  Why  Catholiques 
Refuse  to  Goe  to  Church,  in  which,  so  late  as  1580, 
he  lamented  that  many  Catholics  continued  to 
frequent  the  Anglican  service.  But  it  would  have 
been  very  awkward  to  admit  this  fact  at  Rome  last 
summer. 

Elsewhere  they  find  in  my  description  of  the 
parties  within  the  English  Church  a  marvellous 
insinuation  that  there  have  been  "ritualists"  ever 
since  the  first  years  of  Elizabeth.  "  This,"  they 
naively  say,  "  is  historically  false."  But  then  it 
turns  out  that  by  "ritualists"  they  mean  all  who 
have  the  slightest  shadow  of  belief  in  the  priest- 
hood or  the  sacraments.  It  is  not,  of  course,  to 
be  supposed  that  even  they  are  at  all  orthodox. 
"  That  which  they  constantly  preach  can  with  diffi- 
culty be  reconciled  with  Catholic  teaching."  And 
even  so  they  form  only  a  tiny  fraction  of  the 
English  Church.  "  The  Archdeacon  of  London, 
W.  Sinclair,  was  able  recently  to  assert  that  the 
number  of  ritualists  in  England  does  not  exceed 
35,000,  or  one  in  430  English."  I  do  not  know 
whether  the  Archdeacon  has  ever  said  anything 
that  could  be  twisted  into  this ;  he  may  possibly 
have  said  that  there  were  about  thirty-five  thousand 
members  of  the  English  Church  Union. 

Upon  the  present  state  of  the  English  Church 
the  writers  are  very  bold.  The  Eucharist,  we  learn, 


248     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

is  ordinarily  celebrated  once  a  month.  "In  some 
few  churches  it  takes  place  every  Sunday."  Sugges- 
tive adjectives  of  quantity  again !  But  if  five 
Bishops  were  many  under  Edward  VI  it  is  not  sur- 
prising that  several  thousand  churches  are  some  few 
under  Victoria.  The  writers  were  not  speaking  by 
guess-work,  for  the  very  next  sentence  shows  that 
they  have  referred  to  the  Church  Year-book. 

The  climax  of  misrepresentation  and  malignancy 
is  perhaps  reached  in  the  comment  on  the  following 
sentence  : — 

"  Multa  quoque  ex  aliis  ecclesiis  grati  mutua- 
vimus,  secessus  seu  exercitia  spiritualia  tam  pro 
clero  quam  pro  laicis,  missiones  in  civitatibus  et  in 
pagis,  stationes  quadragesimales,  hoc  genus  omne, 
iam  nobis  propria  sunt." 

I  wrote  this  sentence  very  carefully  and  deliber- 
ately, wishing  to  express  what  we  owe  to  the 
Churches  of  the  Roman  communion.  But  my  grati 
could  no  more  disarm  rancour  than  the  truth  could 
silence  contradiction.  Here  is  the  comment  : — 

"  Here  the  author  admits  with  justice  that  the 
modern  ritualists  have  sought  to  combat  the  Catholic 
Church  in  England  by  turning  against  her  her  own 
arms.  But  when  he  says,  Nobis  propria  sunt,  the 
author  does  not  really  speak  for  the  whole  Anglican 
body,  but  only  for  the  school  to  which  he  belongs. 
The  immense  majority  of  Anglicans  are  averse  to 
such  methods,  and  take  no  interest  in  them." 

And  what  are  these  methods  ?  Retreats  and 
Quiet  Days,  parochial  Missions,  Lenten  courses. 
These  things  are  peculiar  to  the  "  Ritualists,"  in 


"DE   RE   ANGLICANA"   AND   ITS   CRITICS     249 

which  school  my  critics  kindly  place  me.  The 
immense  majority  of  Anglicans  take  no  interest  in 
Missions ;  regard  with  aversion  Quiet  Days  and 
Lenten  sermons.  Risum  teneatis  amid.1 

This  is  the  kind  of  information  that  was  served 
up  for  the  Congregation  of  the  Holy  Office  when 
about  to  enter  on  the  study  of  the  English  ordina- 
tions. It  is  dated  the  8th  of  June.  That  was  the 
day  that  Father  Puller  and  I  left  Rome.  On  the 
same  day,  we  were  told,  the  papers  concerning 
the  question  of  English  orders  were  sent  to  the 
Cardinals  to  whom  the  matter  was  referred. 

1  It  will  be  observed  that  in  this  article  I  examined  only  the  state- 
ments and  suggestions  made  in  the  First  Part  of  the  Risposta,  The 
argument  of  the  Second  Part  with  its  sustained  imputation  of  bad 
faith,  directed  not  so  much  against  my  pamphlet  as  against  all  those 
with  whom  I  was  acting,  could  be  rebutted  only  by  steady  per- 
severance in  the  course  impugned.  It  even  had  a  certain  value  as 
corroborating  our  assertion  that  it  was  useless  to  talk  about  reunion 
without  first  removing  all  doubts  about  the  validity  of  the  English 
ordinations.  The  writers,  for  example,  underlined  my  words,  "  Qui 
de  his  dubitaverit,  quomodo  cum  eo  communionis  vel  voluntatem  con- 
cipere  poterunt ?  "  It  is  difficult  to  understand  how  the  Pope  could 
after  this  write  to  Cardinal  Richard  of  certain  Englishmen,  "qui 
veritatem  rei  de  ordinationibus  suis  exquisere  a  Nobis  sincere  animo 
videbantur."  (Quoted  by  Brandi,  Roma  e  Canterbury,  p.  53).  We  had 
tried  with  the  utmost  sincerity  to  make  it  plain  that  we  were  not 
seeking  instruction  :  we  had  no  doubts  on  the  matter. 


THE   SOURCES   OF  THE   BULL 
APOSTOLICAE  CURAE 


IX 

THE  SOURCES  OF  THE  BULL 
APOSTOLICAE   CURAE 

i 

EXAMINATION   OF   THE   BULL 

(From  the  Contemporary  Review  of  December,  1896) 

THE  papal  condemnation  of  the  English  ordina- 
tions has  been  received  with  a  general  murmur 
of  complacency.  Most  men  hastened  to  say  that 
they  had  expected  nothing  else  ;  some  went  further 
and  declared,  in  a  superior  manner,  that  all  who 
were  looking  for  anything  else  had  been  living  in  a 
fool's  paradise.  Those  who  accepted  the  decision 
as  final,  and  those  who  tossed  it  aside  as  of  no 
account,  vied  with  each  other  in  asserting  that  it 
came  as  a  matter  of  course,  inevitable  as  the  seasons ; 
they  differed  only  in  attributing  the  result  severally 
to  the  infallible  accuracy  or  to  the  invincible 
obstinacy  of  the  Roman  Church.  A  small  minority 
confessed  their  surprise  or  disappointment.  They 
had  looked  for  something  else  ;  not,  perhaps,  for  a 
decision  purely  favourable,  but  at  least  for  a  modifi- 
cation of  the  practice  hitherto  prevailing,  for  an 
expression  of  doubt  which  would  leave  the  question 
open  for  the  future.  Was  this  expectation  the  result 

253 


254     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

merely  of  a  sanguine  temperament  ?     Was  it  be- 
gotten of  an  overstrung  wish  ? 

In  the  early  summer  I  was  at  Rome  with  Fr. 
Puller  and  M.  Portal.  As  every  one  knows,  the 
Pope  had  appointed  a  Commission  of  Inquiry  to 
examine  the  question  of  English  Orders.  Two 
members  of  the  Commission  had  expressly  invited 
us  to  help  them  with  our  special  knowledge  of  the 
facts.  When  the  work  of  the  Commission  was 
finished  we  stayed  in  Rome  for  some  weeks  longer, 
in  obedience  to  a  suggestion  from  a  very  high 
quarter,  to  give  further  information  where  it  was 
needed  and  desired.  All  this  time  there  was 
undoubtedly  in  Rome  a  general  expectation  of 
something  new.  The  Pope  himself,  by  appointing 
the  Commission  of  his  own  motion,  had  made  the 
question  acute  and  practical.  The  reunion  of  the 
separated  Churches  was  known  to  be  his  dearest 
wish,  and  he  was  understood  to  be  specially  in- 
terested in  England.  But  Englishmen  urged,  with 
singular  unanimity,  that  a  full  recognition  of  their 
Orders  was  a  condition  without  which  they  could 
not  even  think  of  reunion.  It  was  natural  to 
suppose  that  in  ordering  an  inquiry  the  Pope  was 
at  least  hoping  to  remove  a  hindrance.  Two  of  the 
Commissioners  had  published  opinions  favourable  to 
the  recognition.  A  third  was  known  to  have  written 
privately  on  the  question  at  the  Pope's  request ; 
his  conclusions  would  probably  have  remained  un- 
known had  not  Cardinal  Vaughan,  in  a  moment  of 
indiscretion,  revealed  to  a  chance  assembly  at  an 
English  seminary  the  fact  that  he  had  pronounced 
emphatically  for  the  validity.  This  was  heard  of  at 
Rome,  and  all  knew  that  Duchesne,  Gasparri,  and 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     255 

de  Augustinis,  the  most  distinguished  historian, 
canonist,  and  theologian  of  the  Commission,  were 
in  some  sort  united  in  defence  of  English  Orders. 

An  entirely  adverse  decision  seemed  impossible. 
Men  talked  not  so  much  about  the  difficulty  of 
making  a  new  departure,  but  rather  about  the  diffi- 
culties which  stood  in  the  way  of  complete  recogni- 
tion. A  very  eminent  ecclesiastic  spoke  to  me  of 
one  such  difficulty ;  it  was  hardly  possible,  he  said, 
to  recognize  English  Orders  without  defining  the 
essentials  of  a  valid  ordination,  and  the  Roman 
Church  had  always  avoided  such  a  definition.  The 
practice  of  three  hundred  years,  indeed,  of  itself 
cried  out  against  a  sudden  reversal ;  yet  a  change 
of  some  sort  seemed  inevitable.  "  These  are  very 
extraordinary  people,"  said  a  certain  Cardinal,  after 
reading  an  account  of  the  English  Church  ;  "of 
course,  we  cannot  acknowledge  their  Orders  all  at 
once,  but  something  will  have  to  be  done."  For 
three  hundred  years  English  clergymen  submitting 
to  the  Roman  Church  had  always  been  reordained. 
That  fact  alone  threw  a  doubt  upon  their  Orders, 
which  would  not  easily  be  solved.  But  if  our 
friends  were  doubtful,  some  of  those  who  were  at 
the  opposite  pole  of  friendship  were  equally  harassed 
by  uncertainty.  One  evening  in  May  a  well-known 
prelate  of  English  birth  was  sitting  in  Cardinal 
Rampolla's  antechamber,  talking  to  a  French 
Dominican  lately  returned  from  the  East.  "  There 
is  a  big  question  here,"  he  said,  "about  Anglican 
Orders.  Very  strange !  The  High  Church  claim 
to  have  valid  Orders.  Two  French  priests  are  sup- 
porting them — the  Abbe  Duchesne  and  the  Abb6 
Portal.  There  has  been  a  Commission  of  Inquiry 


256     A  ROMAN    DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

and  the  matter  is  now  going  to  the  H  oly  Office.  There 
will  not  be  much  change — I  think"  A  bystander, 
who  could  not  help  overhearing  the  remarks,  noted 
them  down,  being  interested  in  the  reserve. 

An  Italian  priest  of  our  acquaintance  who  had 
been  intimately  concerned  in  the  question,  had  a 
farewell  audience  of  the  Pope.  Speaking  of  English 
affairs  he  said,  "  These  Anglicans  are  at  the  door." 
"And  I  will  throw  it  wide  open,"  exclaimed  the 
Pope,  with  enthusiasm.  Our  friend  left  Rome  con- 
vinced that,  whatever  was  the  outcome  of  the  inquiry, 
Leo  XIII  would  refuse  to  promulge  an  adverse 
decision.  If  the  controversy  could  not  be  closed  in 
a  favourable  sense  it  would  at  least  be  left  open. 

There  were  indeed  other  voices.  A  not  unfriendly 
observer,  who  had  the  best  of  opportunities  for 
knowing  what  would  come,  told  us  that  he  looked 
for  an  absolute  condemnation.  "It  is  impossi- 
ble, utterly  impossible,"  cried  one  of  our  friends 
impulsively.  "  C'est  toujours  1'impossible  qui  arrive," 
was  the  oracular  reply.  It  was  known  that  strenuous 
efforts  were  being  made  to  procure  such  a  result. 
During  the  month  that  followed  the  closing  of  the 
Commission  various  opinions  were  expressed  about 
the  next  step.  The  Pope  would  send  the  matter 
to  the  Holy  Office ;  he  would  appoint  a  special 
committee  of  Cardinals  to  consider  it ;  he  would  deal 
with  it  himself  in  person.  If  it  went  to  the  Holy 
Office,  we  were  told,  there  was  nothing  to  hope  for 
but  at  best  a  tacit  continuation  of  the  existing 
practice.  Most  of  the  Cardinals  whom  we  saw 
professed  entire  ignorance  of  the  Holy  Father's 
intentions.  A  sharp  struggle  in  the  innermost 
councils  of  the  Curia  was  anticipated.  A  very 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     257 

highly  placed  Cardinal,  in  bidding  us  farewell,  said 
impressively,  "  Remember  that  you  have  some  very 
strong  friends  in  Rome." 

At  length  we  heard  that  all  the  documents  and 
arguments  were  to  be  sent  to  certain  Cardinals  on 
June  8,  with  a  direction  to  study  them  carefully  for 
a  month  at  least.  That  was  the  very  day  we  left 
Rome,  and  we  were  unable  to  find  out  whether  the 
question  was  referred  to  the  Holy  Office  or  no. 
We  learn  from  the  Bull  that  such  was  the  case. 
We  do  not  learn,  nor  could  we  expect  to  learn,  any- 
thing about  the  discussion  which  ensued.  The 
disputes  of  the  Sacred  Congregation  are  not  made 
public  ;  we  are  never  likely  to  know  what  part  was 
played  by  the  strong  friends  of  whose  support  we 
were  assured.  What  we  do  know  is  the  result. 
The  Cardinals  of  the  Holy  Office  decided  unani- 
mously against  the  validity  of  English  Orders. 

How  is  the  result  to  be  accounted  for?  Why 
was  the  general  expectation  so  completely  falsified  ? 
It  is  an  obvious  thing  to  say  that  we  see  here  the 
result  of  a  candid  and  exhaustive  investigation. 
The  trend  of  opinion  was  in  favour  of  the  validity ; 
the  wishes  of  the  Pope  himself  were  supposed  to 
look  that  way.  But  the  truth  prevailed  ;  careful 
inquiry  showed  the  falsity  of  the  favourable  opinion  ; 
the  highest  wishes  and  the  hopes  that  gathered 
round  them  were  inevitably  swept  aside.  It  is  a 
clear  and  simple  argument,  very  comforting  to  those 
who  played  an  active  part  against  us  in  the  con- 
troversy. But  a  slight  examination  of  the  Bull  will 
awaken  some  doubts  about  the  conclusion. 

In  the  first  place,  the  Bull  does  not  bear  those 
marks  of  careful  and  exhaustive  study  which  might 


258     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

be  expected.  The  historical  argument  contains 
extraordinary  blunders,  surely  out  of  place  in  the 
finished  work  of  experts.  Some  of  these,  which 
have  no  important  bearing  on  my  present  subject, 
were  exposed  as  soon  as  the  Bull  appeared. 
Another  I  shall  deal  with  below.  The  theological 
argument  is  very  nebulous.  Its  defenders  are  not 
sure  of  its  meaning.  As  every  one  knows,  the 
English  ordinations  are  declared  invalid  on  account 
of  defective  form  and  intention.  A  French  writer 
has  shown  that  the  defect  of  intention  is  inferred 
from  the  use  of  a  defective  form.1  But  English 
critics  of  the  Bull  have  shown  that  what  is  lacking 
in  our  form  is  lacking  also  in  other  forms  which  are 
recognized  as  valid  by  the  Roman  Church  ;  indeed, 
in  the  ancient  Roman  form  itself.  Father  Bernard 
Vaughan  replies  hotly  that  the  fault  is  attributed  not 
to  the  form  in  itself,  but  to  the  employment  of  the 
form  in  a  new  and  defective  sense.2  That  is  to  say, 
the  defect  of  form  results  from  a  defective  intention. 
The  two  arguments  combined  will  make  an  excellent 
circle.  Read  apart,  they  leave  us  wondering  what 
the  Bull  does  mean.3  Is  this  the  result  of  thorough 
and  exhaustive  study  ?  Again,  we  read  in  the  Bull 
some  old  and  venerable  arguments  which  have  done 
duty  in  the  controversy  for  generations.  I  do  not 
complain  of  that ;  the  use  of  old  arguments  is 
legitimate,  as  long  as  they  are  thought  to  retain  any 
force  against  old  positions.  But  the  defence  of  the 
English  Ordinal  has  lately  proceeded  on  new  lines. 

1  Revue  Anglo- Romaine .    Tom.  iii.  p.  598. 

2  Tablet,  Oct.  31,  p.  706. 

3  Father  Brand!  (Condanna  delle  Ord.  AngL,  p.  72)  missed  my  point 
here,  supposing  me  to  have  found  this  vicious  circle  in  the  Bull  itself. 
It  was  in  the  interpreters  of  the  Bull. 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     259 

Mgr.  Gasparri,  following  the  lead  of  his  colleague, 
M.  Boudinhon,  startled  us  a  year  ago  by  grounding 
the  vadidity  of  our  ordinations  upon  the  use  of 
certain  prayers,  the  importance  of  which  we  had 
overlooked.  To  the  P.  de  Augustinis  rumour  attri- 
buted an  even  more  startling  and  original  defence. 
In  the  argument  of  the  Bull  we  might  expect  to  see 
these  new  defences  attacked  and  pulverized.  We 
find  one  of  them  barely  alluded  to,  the  other  entirely 
ignored.  Is  this  the  outcome  of  a  laborious  in- 

o 

vestigation  ? 

But,  in  the  second  place,  the  Bull  itself  testifies  to 
its  own  origin.  The  decision  of  the  Cardinals  is 
described  in  significant  terms  :  "ft  ad  unum  con- 
senserc,  propositam  causam  iam  pridem  ab  Apostolica 
sede  plene  fuisse  et  cognitam  et  iudicatam  :  eius  autem 
denuo  instituia  actaque  quaestione.emersisse  quanta  ilia 
iustitiae  sapientiaeque pondere  totam  rem  absolvisset" 
It  was  not  a  new  decision  at  all ;  the  Cardinals  found 
that  the  Holy  See  had  already  long  since  decided  the 
question  ;  the  new  inquiry  served  only  to  illustrate 
the  justice  and  wisdom  then  displayed.  We  learn 
also  from  the  Bull  what  was  the  precedent  here 
referred  to.  It  was  the  decision  of  the  year  1704, 
given  by  Clement  XI  in  the  Gordon  case.  This, 
we  are  told,  has  always  been  regarded  by  the  Roman 
Court  as  a  final  settlement ;  nothing  but  ignorance 
of  its  true  nature  has  enabled  any  Catholic  writer  to 
treat  the  question  of  English  Orders  as  an  open  one.1 

1  Adeo  ut,  quoties  deinceps  in  re  simili  decernendum  fuit,  toties 
idem  dementis  XI  communicatum  sit  decretum.  Quas  cum  ita 
sint,  non  videt  nemo  controversiam  temporibus  nostris  exsuscitam, 
Apostolicae  Sedis  iudicio  definitam  multo  antea  fuisse  :  documentisque 
His  baud  satis  quam  oportuerat  cognitis,  fortasse  factum  ut  scriptor 
aliquis  catholicus  disputationem  de  ea  libere  habere  non  dubitarit. 


260     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

A  natural  question  rises  to  the  mind.  If  these 
circumstances  were  known  to  the  authorities  at 
Rome,  why  was  any  investigation  ordered  ?  If 
nothing  but  ignorance  of  these  facts  could  render 
possible  a  free  discussion  of  the  subject,  why  should 
not  that  ignorance  have  been  dispelled  by  simply 
publishing  the  truth  ?  Why  this  apparatus  of  a 
Commission  of  Inquiry  ?  Was  it  a  farce  ?  Respect 
for  the  personal  character  of  Leo  XIII  forbids  us 
to  attribute  to  him  so  stupid  a  pleasantry.  The 
appointment  of  the  Commission  must  have  had 
some  serious  object.  What  was  it?  It  can  hardly 
have  been  to  inquire  into  the  facts  of  the  Gordon 
case.  They  were  all  on  record.  The  Commissioners 
were  assuredly  not  called  to  Rome  to  inform  the 
Pope  what  his  predecessor  Clement  XI  had  done. 
Were  they  invited  to  sit  in  judgment  on  his  decision  ? 
That  seems  an  impossible  subversion  of  parts.  WThy, 
again,  was  there  so  general  an  expectation  of  a  new 
departure  ?  Was  this  confined  to  those  who  were 
ignorant  of  the  Gordon  case  ?  We  found  it  in  the 
minds  of  some  who  could  not  possibly  share  this 
ignorance.  What  then  ?  Did  they  expect  a  Papal 
decision  to  be  overthrown  ? 

Here  is  a  budget  of  questions.  I  have  not  a 
string  of  answers  ready  to  hand,  but  I  will  call 
attention  to  some  circumstances  which  may  possibly 
throw  a  little  light  upon  the  difficulty.  I  am  very 
imperfectly  informed,  and  yet,  at  the  same  time,  I 
have  to  be  on  my  guard  against  a  breach  of  confi- 
dence. It  will  easily  be  understood  that  our  opportu- 
nities of  acquiring  knowledge  at  Rome  were  strictly 
limited,  and  at  the  same  time  some  things  came  in 
our  way  which  we  are  not  altogether  free  to  disclose 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOL1CAE  CURAE     261 

Soon  after  the  opening  of  the  Commission  we 
learnt  that  the  chief  rock  ahead  was  the  Gordon 
decision.  We  were  not  a  little  surprised.  The 
existing  practice  was  known  to  be  grounded  on 
that  case,  but  small  value  was  commonly  attached 
to  the  precedent.  What  was  known  of  it  was 
due  to  Le  Quien,  who,  in  his  reply  to  Le  Courayer, 
published  certain  documents  in  the  case  obtained 
from  the  Holy  Office.  From  these  it  appeared 
that  John  Gordon,  Bishop  of  Galloway,  ordained 
according  to  the  English  rite,  who  had  gone  into 
exile  with  James  II,  petitioned  the  Holy  See  to 
declare  his  Orders  invalid,  in  order  that  he  might 
be  reordained.  In  his  petition  he  set  out  reasons 
for  the  invalidity,  including  a  relation  of  the  Nag's 
Head  fable,  a  preposterous  account  of  the  English 
Forms  of  Ordination,  and  a  very  inadequate  com- 
plaint against  the  intention  of  the  English  bishops. 
The  matter  was  referred  to  the  Holy  Office,  and 
the  Orders  which  Gordon  had  received  were 
declared  invalid.  The  decree,  as  given  by  Le 
Quien,  was  apparently  based  upon  the  statements 
of  the  petition.  It  was  therefore  supposed  to  be 
infected  by  the  vice  of  its  origin.  It  had  a  certain 
validity,  as  ruling  the  practice ;  but  theological  or 
argumentative  value  it  had  none.  The  question 
could  be  reopened,  as  one  upon  which  there  had 
been  no  real  adjudication. 

Pressing  these  considerations,  we  were  told  that 
Le  Quien's  account  was  erroneous  or  defective. 
The  Holy  Office  did  not  proceed  merely  upon 
the  statements  of  Gordon's  petition.  The  English 
rites  were  carefully  examined.  A  Consultor  named 
Genetti,  a  man  of  some  mark  in  his  time,  was  even 


262     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

sent  to  England  to  pursue  inquiries.  As  a  result 
of  these  investigations,  the  Sacred  Congregation 
decided  that  Gordon  was  invalidly  ordained.  We 
tried  to  obtain  further  information.  We  asked 
if  we  might  be  allowed  to  examine  the  documents 
in  the  case.  We  were  told  that  the  archives  of 
the  Holy  Office  were  absolutely  inaccessible.  We 
gathered  a  few  hints  of  what  was  going  on  in  the 
Commission.  It  was  said  that  Cardinal  Mazzella, 
who  presided  over  the  sittings,  forbade  any  attempt 
to  go  behind  the  Gordon  decision.  The  Com- 
mission, he  said,  was  under  the  Holy  Office,  the 
commissioners  were  consultors  of  the  Congrega- 
tion, and  could  not  revise  the  decree  of  their 
superiors.  They  might  investigate  the  history 
of  the  controversy  ;  they  might  analyse  the  con- 
stituents of  the  English  rite  ;  but  they  could  not 
debate  the  validity  of  the  form,  which  had  already 
been  judged  invalid.  This  we  pieced  together 
from  scattered  hints.  We  caught  a  suggestion, 
also,  that  the  form  had  been  pronounced  invalid 
because  it  did  not  consist  in  a  prayer.  This 
implied  that  in  the  year  1704  the  Holy  Office 
was  so  far  penetrated  by  the  teaching  of  Morinus 
as  to  rule,  contrary  to  the  then  prevailing  opinion 
of  the  schools,  that  the  form  of  ordination  must 
essentially  be  a  prayer.  This  was  hardly  credible  ; 
and  the  less  so  as  we  knew  that  only  a  month  later 
a  body  of  consultors  of  the  same  Congregation, 
in  their  puzzling  response  on  Abyssinian  Orders, 
inclined  to  the  view  that  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum 
was  a  sufficient  form  for  priestly  ordination.1 

What   we   heard    of    this    matter    justified    the 

This  subject  is  discussed  in  De  Hierarchia  Anglicana,  App.  vi. 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     263 

opinion  freely  expressed  at  Rome,  that  if  our 
question  went  to  the  Holy  Office  it  was  useless 
to  look  for  any  change  of  the  existing  practice. 
The  Cardinals  individually  might  be  well  disposed, 
but  acting  in  the  Congregation  they  were  bound 
by  their  own  precedents ;  they  might  refuse  to 
put  out  any  fresh  condemnation,  but  they  would 
not  innovate.  We  know  from  the  Bull  that  the 
question  did  go  to  the  Holy  Office,  and  the  result 
more  than  fulfils  the  prediction.  The  Gordon 
decision  is  quoted  as  conclusive.  Our  information 
about  the  ground  of  that  decision  is  also  verified 
in  part.  It  was  based  exclusively  upon  a  defect 
of  form  and  intention.  But  we  are  not  told  in 
what  the  defect  of  form  consisted.  Is  there  a 
definition  in  the  documents  ?  If  so,  one  could 
wish  that  it  had  been  published.  We  are  afforded 
some  negative  information.  We  are  told  that  the 
condemnation  of  Gordon's  Orders  did  not  rest 
upon  the  omission  from  the  English  rite  of  the 
Tradition  of  the  Instruments.  But  even  this  is 
not  asserted  directly,  as  might  be  expected.  We 
are  asked  to  infer  it.  If  that  had  been  the  case, 
we  are  told,  the  Holy  Office  would,  according  to 
custom  (de  more],  have  required  not  an  absolute 
but  a  conditional  reordination.  In  this  passage, 
if  I  am  not  mistaken,  we  have  another  example 
of  extraordinary  blundering  in  the  conduct  of  the 
argument. 

The  classical  authority  for  the  custom  referred  to 
is  a  passage  in  that  wonderful  medley,  the  treatise 
De  Synodo  Dicecesana  of  Benedict  XIV.  The 
origin  of  the  practice  of  conditional  reordination  in 
such  a  case  is  there  referred  to  a  certain  resolution 


264     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

of  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  the  Council.  The 
Tradition  of  the  Instruments  had  been  accidentally 
omitted  in  the  ordination  of  a  priest,  and  the 
Congregation  was  consulted  as  to  what  should  be 
done.  The  prevailing  opinion  seems  to  have  been 
that  the  omitted  ceremony  should  be  supplied.  A 
decretal  of  Gregory  IX  was  quoted  in  support  of 
this,  and  also  a  passage  from  Natalis  Alexander.  In 
deference,  however,  to  the  opinion  of  certain  theo- 
logians who  held  that  the  Tradition  of  the  Instru- 
ments must  not  be  treated  separately,  but  should 
cohere  with  other  parts  of  the  rite,  the  Sacred 
Congregation,  for  greater  caution,  ordered  the 
whole  ordination  to  be  conditionally  repeated.1 
Such  is  the  origin  of  the  practice.  And  what  is  the 
date  of  this  resolution  ?  It  was  adopted,  says  Bene- 
dict XIV,  "  priusquam  huic  operi  extremam  manum 
admoveremus."  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  by 
these  words  he  indicates  a  date  after  his  book  was 
begun,  and  before  it  was  finished.  Now  he  tells 
us  in  the  Preface  that  he  began  it  after  his  pro- 
motion to  the  See  of  Bologna  and  finished  it  after 
his  election  as  Pope.  He  was  promoted  to  Bologna 
in  1731,  and  was  raised  to  the  apostolic  throne  in 
in  1 740.  Between  these  dates,  then,  falls  the  reso- 
lution in  question.  But  that  being  so,  how  can 
it  be  said  that  in  1 704  custom  would  have  required 
conditional  reordination  in  case  the  Tradition  of 
the  Instruments  were  omitted  ?  The  custom  was 
not  yet  established.2 

1  De  Synodo  Dicecesana.     Lib.  viii.  cap.  x.  $}  i,  12,  and  13. 

2  Father  Brandi,  in  the  Civiltd  Cattolica  of  January  2nd  following, 
and  Father  Ryder,  in  a  long  correspondence  maintained  in  the  columns 
of  the  Guardian  during  the  next  three  months,  made  out  a  very  good 
case  for  the  probability  that  the  Holy  Office  in   1704  would  have 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOL1CAE  CURAE     265 

This  explanation  must  have  slipped  into  the  Bull 
by  an  extraordinary  oversight.  Taken  in  connexion 
with  other  blunders,  it  shows,  in  spite  of  all  ap- 
pearances to  the  contrary,  how  incomplete  was  the 
preparation  of  the  materials  upon  which  the  decision 
was  based.  But  to  return  to  the  point,  this  infer- 
ence failing  us,  we  are  thrown  back  into  entire 
ignorance  of  the  specific  defect  alleged  in  the 
Gordon  case.  Cannot  this  ignorance  be  dispelled  ? 
Is  it  too  much  to  hope  that  even  yet  we  may  have 
the  judgment  of  the  Holy  Office  published  in  full 
by  authority  ? 

How  important  this  may  be  I  will  now  try  to 
show.  Why  is  the  Gordon  precedent  regarded  as 
binding  ?  One  can  easily  understand  that  a  mere 
Committee  of  Consultors  was  forbidden  to  go  be- 
hind it.  The  Sacred  Cono-re^ation  itself  was 

o       o 

naturally  unwilling  to  reverse  it.  But  was  the 
Roman  Pontiff  himself  bound  ?  All  the  steps  that 
he  had  taken  indicated  a  real  wish  to  reopen  the 
question.  He  cannot  have  appointed  the  Com- 
mission merely  to  report  on  a  foregone  conclusion. 
He  conveyed  to  his  intimates  the  idea  that  he  was 
bent  on  a  new  departure.  If  he  had  followed  his 
bent,  if  there  had  been  a  real  investigation,  the 
result  might  perhaps  have  been  a  condemnation 
of  English  Orders ;  but  the  decision  would  have 
been  conceived  in  a  different  form  ;  it  would 
assuredly  not  have  dealt  so  loosely  with  the  terms 
of  the  problem  ;  it  would  not  have  ignored  the 
newer  conditions  of  the  controversy.  As  it  is,  there 

acted  in  the  way  indicated  ;  but  I  do  not  think  they  established  the 
fact  that  there  was  at  that  time  anything  praescriptum  de  more,  as 
asserted  in  the  Bull. 


266     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

is  no  pretence  of  a  really  new  decision.  The  old 
one  is  confirmed,  and  is  treated  as  in  itself  conclu- 
sive. The  Pope  has  failed  to  reopen  the  question, 
as  he  desired.  What  was  the  hindrance  ? 

The  answer  is  obscurely  indicated  in  the  Bull. 
Readers  of  the  authorized  translation  were  puzzled 
by  the  careful  dating  of  the  decree  given  in  the 
Gordon  case,  feria  quinta.  The  date  is  significant. 
Matters  of  ordinary  moment  are  dealt  with  by  the 
Holy  Office  in  their  ordinary  sessions  ;  but  graver 
matters  are  reserved  for  an  extraordinary  session, 
presided  over  by  the  Pope  in  person.  This  extra- 
ordinary session  is  always  held  on  Thursday,  feria 
quinta.  A  decree  of  the  Sacred  Congregation  thus 
dated  has  therefore  an  additional  solemnity.  It  is 
pronounced  by  the  Pope  in  person,  and  none  but 
the  Pope  can  vary  it.  But  can  even  the  Pope  vary 
it  ?  A  small  but  influential  school  of  Roman  theo- 
logians holds  that  he  cannot.  It  is  well  known 
what  diverse  interpretations  of  the  definition  of 
infallibility  are  current  in  the  Roman  schools. 
There  are  extremists,  and  there  are  minimizers. 
By  some  of  the  former  it  is  held  that  all  decrees 
given  by  the  Pope  in  the  Holy  Office,  feria  quinta, 
come  under  the  definition.  They  are  therefore, 
so  far  as  they  deal  with  faith  and  morals,  irreform- 
able.  Not  even  the  Pope  himself  may  call  in 
question  the  decrees  of  his  predecessors  thus  pro- 
nounced. The  Gordon  decision  would  come  under 
this  rule. 

Is  this  the  way  in  which  the  Pope  was  bound  ?  Is 
he  constrained  by  the  opinion  of  a  small  school  of 
theologians  ?  To  the  average  Englishman  such  an 
idea  may  seem  strange  ;  he  conceives  the  Pope  as 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     267 

an  absolute  spiritual  monarch,  and  wonders  why  he 
should  not  break  through  such  trammels.  But  it  is 
a  fixed  principle  of  the  Roman  Curia,  and  a  principle 
founded  in  grave  reasons,  never  to  act  in  a  manner 

o 

that  would  directly  contravene  any  theological 
opinion  seriously  maintained  in  the  schools  and 
tolerated  by  the  Church.  This  tutiorism,  as  it  is 
called — this  principle  of  always  following  the  safer 
course — finds  its  chief  scope  in  regulating  the 
practice  of  the  Church  with  regard  to  the  sacra- 
ments ;  but  it  is  obviously  applicable  also  to  such 
delicate  questions  as  those  which  turn  upon  the 
definition  of  infallibility.  No  decision  of  the  Holy 
See  can  safely  be  impugned  which,  in  the  opinion 
of  any  serious  theologians,  is  infallible  and  irreform- 
able.  The  Pope  himself  could  not  revise  it,  unless 
he  should  first  formally  reprobate  and  extinguish 
the  opinion  which  bars  his  way.  But  the  formal 
reprobation  of  an  opinion  maintained  by  grave 
theologians  is  the  most  extreme  exercise  of  the 
Papal  authority  ;  it  is  a  thing  to  be  done  only  under 
pressure  of  urgent  necessity. 

If,  then,  I  am  not  misinformed,  the  Pope  found 
himself  practically  debarred  from  reopening  any 
question  touching  faith  and  morals  decided  in  the 
Gordon  case.  There  may  have  been  a  debate, 
a  struggle,  over  the  value  to  be  assigned  to  the 
opinion  which  stood  in  the  way.  There  may  have 
been  argument  about  the  scope  of  the  Gordon 
decision  itself,  and  its  relation  to  faith  or  morals. 
It  must  have  had  some  relation  to  facts  as  well. 
To  ask  what  constitutes  the  essential  form  in  the 
English  rite  is  to  raise  a  question  of  fact.  And 
hence  arises  the  importance  of  knowing  accurately 


268     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

the  terms  of  the  decision.  It  pronounced  the  form 
of  the  English  rite  invalid.  But  what  was  regarded 
as  the  form  ?  The  majority  of  theologians  would 
say  that  some  one  prayer  or  other  formula  must 
constitute  the  essential  form.  Others  would  find  it 
in  a  combination  of  the  various  elements  which  the 
rite  contains.  Taking  the  former  view,  theologians 
of  acknowledged  eminence  have  pointed  out  several 
prayers  in  the  Ordinal  which,  in  their  judgment, 
are  sufficient.  But  others,  again,  have  fastened 
upon  some  element  of  the  rite  as  the  essential  form 
which  could  not  be  defended  as  adequate.  There  is, 
for  example,  a  sort  of  blessing,  which  follows  the  ex- 
amination of  the  candidates.  This  was  regarded  by 
Billuart  as  the  form,  and  he  pronounced  it  insuffi- 
cient ;  a  judgment  in  which  every  theologian  would 
probably  concur.  Whence  did  he  derive  his  idea  ? 
Is  it  possible  that  this  was  the  form  which  the  Holy 
Office  declared  defective?  If  so,  the  decision,  so 
far  as  it  concerns  the  faith,  was  one  with  which  no 
English  theologian  will  quarrel.  We  should  reply 
that  there  was  an  error  with  regard  to  the  facts. 
But  in  that  case  the  decision  is  not,  in  the  view  of 
any  theologian,  irreformable.  The  most  extreme 
interpretation  of  the  Vatican  definition  will  not 
make  the  Pope  infallible  in  matters  of  fact.  In  the 
recent  Bull  we  find  a  similar  inaccuracy.  Here, 
again,  the  Pope  has  taken  as  the  essential  form  of 
the  English  rite  a  phrase  which,  at  all  events  apart 
from  its  context,  no  English  divine  acknowledges 
to  be  such.  This  he  declares  insufficient.  We 
have  no  quarrel  with  him  on  that  account.  Some 
of  us  may  contend  that  the  words,  "  Receive  the 
Holy  Ghost,"  taken  by  themselves,  would  be  a 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE   CURAE     269 

sufficient  form  ;  but  the  contention  is  purely 
academic,  and  has  no  bearing  on  the  validity  of 
English  Orders.  We  have  other  objections,  and 
graver,  to  the  reasons  on  which  the  declaration 
is  grounded ;  but  whether  they  be  good  or  bad, 
their  application  to  the  question  at  issue  is  vitiated 
by  the  error  in  matter  of  fact.  It  is  not  impossible 
that  in  the  Gordon  case,  if  all  the  documents  were 
published,  a  like  state  of  things  would  be  disclosed. 
A  theological  proposition,  which  we  should  not  be 
able  or  should  not  care  to  dispute,  may  have  been 
erroneously  applied  to  the  facts  of  the  English 
ordinations. 

On  these  grounds  I  urge  the  importance  of  a  dis- 
closure of  all  that  can  be  known  about  the  Gordon 
case.  I  hope  that  my  motives  in  pressing  this  will 
not  be  misconstrued.  They  are  the  same  as  those 
which  stirred  all  with  whom  I  was  acting  in  our 
visit  to  Rome,  and  in  the  movement  which  led  to 
that  visit.  With  a  single  eye  to  a  future,  and 
perhaps  far  distant,  reunion  of  Christendom,  we 
laboured  to  find  a  course  by  which  the  Church  of 
Rome  might  retreat  from  a  false  position  with  the 
least  possible  loss  of  dignity,  with  the  least  possible 
dislocation  of  traditional  policy.  We  have  reason 
to  believe  that  our  labours  were  looked  upon  with 
no  disfavour  by  the  highest  authorities.  In  spite 
of  that,  we  have  met  with  a  grievous  disappoint- 
ment. "  I  do  not  know  that  I  shall  ever  recover 
from  this  blow,"  writes  one  of  our  friends  over  sea. 
But,  in  recovering  from  the  first  sense  of  defeat, 
our  plain  duty  is  thoroughly  to  search  out  the 
causes  of  the  disappointment.  I  make  this  essay 
in  that  direction.  If  it  be  true  that  we  stumbled 


270     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

upon  a  decision  of  the  Holy  See  which,  on  the 
tutiorist  principle,  is  covered  by  the  definition  of 
infallibility,  our  difficulty  is  narrowed  down  to 
a  clear  issue.  If  the  Gordon  decision  stands  in  the 
way  because  of  a  theological  opinion  regarding  it 
as  irreformable,  then  the  question  of  English  Orders 
can  be  effectively  reopened  only  on  one  of  three 
conditions  :  Either  the  definition  of  infallibility  must 
be  abandoned,  or  the  restraining  opinion  must  be 
reprobated,  or  the  decision  itself  must  be  shown 
faulty  in  matter  of  fact.  The  first  alternative 
would,  no  doubt,  commend  itself  to  most  English- 
men, but  it  is  not  for  present  discussion  ;  the  second 
also  raises  difficulties  which  we  are  not  yet  called 
upon  to  face  ;  the  third  is  dependent  upon  evidence 
that  may  possibly  be  forthcoming. 

The  recent  Bull  itself  adds  little  or  nothing,  I 
believe,  to  the  difficulty.  It  stands  or  falls  with  the 
Gordon  decision.  The  reasoned  argument  which 
it  contains  can  easily  be  set  aside.  I  note  one 
point,  the  importance  of  which  I  am  unable  to 
gauge.  The  Pope  tells  us  that  he  summoned  the 
Cardinals  of  the  Holy  Office  before  \\\m,feria  quinta, 
and  they  gave  their  judgment.  But  he  did  not 
there  and  then  confirm  it.1  He  took  time  to  con- 
sider, and  eventually  gave  his  decision  in  the  form 
of  a  Bull.  Has  he  thus  avoided  a  pronouncement 
which,  in  the  opinion  of  some  theologians,  would 
be  irreformable  ?  Those  who  would  fain  share  the 
hopes  which  some  of  us  entertain,  need  not  be 
discouraged  by  the  air  of  finality,  the  atmosphere 

1  Verumtamen  optimum  factu  duximus  supersedere  sententiae, 
quo  et  melius  perpenderemus  conveniretne  expediretque  eandem  rem 
auctoritate  nostra  rursus  declarari,  etuberiorem  divini  luminis  copiam 
supplices  imploraremus. 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     271 

as  of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  which  is  cast  about 
the  decision  by  the  use  of  the  curial  language. 
Minds  that  are  unfamiliar  with  that  remarkable 
dialect  may  be  awestruck  by  the  solemn  condemna- 
tion of  all  who  shall  challenge  the  Bull  as  obrepti- 
tious  or  subreptitious.  But  these  are,  of  course, 
only  the  common  forms  of  the  Chancery.  It  is 
pretty  safe  to  assume  that  in  the  Bull  itself  there  is 
nothing  to  prevent  a  reopening  of  the  question. 

It  is  manifest  that  without  such  reopening  the 
reunion  of  Christendom  remains  impossible.  The 
Church  of  England  has  not  a  shadow  of  doubt  con- 
cerning her  own  Orders,  and  cannot  tolerate  the 
expression  of  doubt  by  others.  Until  they  are 
fully  acknowledged  there  can  be  no  union.  But 
the  Church  of  England  is  not  a  negligible  quantity 
in  Christendom.  She  is  not  like  the  separate 
Churches  of  the  East,  venerable  for  their  antiquity, 
more  venerable  for  their  stedfastness  through  cen- 
turies of  repression  and  persecution,  but  insignificant 
in  numbers,  stationary  or  retrograde  in  point  of  in- 
fluence. It  was  said  to  me  by  a  Roman  friend  who 
is  deeply  versed  in  the  problem,  that  Rome,  Eng- 
land, and  Russia  are  the  three  great  factors  in  the 
reunion  of  Christendom,  and  that  a  union  of  any 
two  of  these,  excluding  the  third,  would  only  aggra- 
vate the  evil  of  disunion.  Therefore,  every  one 
who  would  labour  for  union  must  labour  also  for 
the  favourable  solution  of  the  question  of  the  ordi- 
nations. 

I  do  not  pretend  that  this  is  the  only  or  the 
greatest  difficulty.  There  remain  great  questions, 
going  down  to  the  roots  of  Christian  practice,  if  not 
of  Christian  belief,  the  solution  of  which  would 


272     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

overtax  any  mere  human  wisdom.  No  man  can 
hope  for  reunion  who  does  not  believe  in  the  divine 
origin  and  the  divine  ordering  of  the  Church.  But 
to  them  who  believe  in  this  there  is  no  word  im- 
possible. They  watch  for  opportunities.  They 
welcome  every  expression  of  hope,  coming  from 
whatever  side.  On  the  morning  of  the  day  we  left 
Rome  we  were  waiting  in  Cardinal  Rampolla's  ante- 
chamber, when  there  came  out  from  the  inner  room 
a  number  of  Cardinals,  who  had  been  attending  a 
congregation.  One  of  them  spied  us,  came  up,  and 
seizing  a  hand  of  each,  cried  aloud:  "  Vous  partez 
done  aujourd'hui ;  trop  tot,  trop  tot !  Mais  nous  nous 
reverrons ;  nous  arrangerons  nos  diffeVends  ;  nous 
nous  reverrons."  It  was  done  so  publicly  that  I  need 
not  reserve  his  name.  I  do  not  expect  to  see 
Cardinal  Segna  again  ;  but  as  long  as  I  live  I  shall 
remember  his  kindness,  and  I  have  an  unshaken 
faith  in  the  fulfilment  of  the  rest  of  his  prophecy. 


II 

THE   GORDON   DECISION 

(From  the  Guardian  of  December  9,  1896) 

In  an  article  written  for  the  current  number  of 
the  Contemporary  Review  I  discussed  the  rela- 
tions of  the  Bull  Apostolicae  Curae  to  the  Gordon 
decision  of  1704,  and  expressed  a  hope  that  some 
at  least  of  the  documents  in  this  case  might  be  pub- 
lished. My  wish  was  anticipated.  The  article  was 
hardly  through  the  press  when  I  received  the  Civilta 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     273 

Cattolica  of  November  nth,  containing  the  text  of 
the  decree.     It  is  as  follows  : — 

"  Feria  v  diei  17  Aprilis,  1704,  in  solita  congrega- 
tione  S.R.  et  universalis  Inquisitionis  habita  in 
Palatio  S.  Petri  Coram  SSmo.  Dno.  Nro.  Clemente 
Papa  xi. 

"  Delata  instantia  Joannis  dementis  Gordon 
Episcopi  Anglicani,  ad  Catholicam  fidem  conversi, 
et  quibusdam  scripturis  seu  iuribus  alias  collectis 
pro  simili  casu,  quamvis  olim  non  fuerit  decisus, 
vel  saltern  hac  de  re  nihil  fuisset  decretum,  cum 
voto  DD.  consultorum,  qua  petebat,  ut  non  ob- 
stante  consecratione  episcopali  obtenta  ab  epis- 
copis  sectae  Anglicanae,  et  ritu  solito  illius  pseudo- 
episcoporum,  sibi  concederetur  facultas  transeundi 
ad  ordinem  Presbyteratus  ritu  catholico  suscipien- 
dum,  cum  sua  consecratio  ad  Episcopatum  nulla  sit, 
turn  propter  deficientiam  successionis  episcoporum 
in  Anglia  et  Scotia,  qui  ilium  consecraverunt,  turn 
propter  alia  motiva,  quibus  nulla  redditur  dicta  illius 
consecratio. 

"  SSmus.,  auditis  votis  emorum  Cardinalium, 
decrevit  quod  loannes  Clemens  Gordon  ex  integro 
et  absolute  ordinetur  ad  omnes  ordines  et  prae- 
cipue  Presbyteratus,  et  quatenus  non  fuerit  con- 
firmatus,  prius  Sacramentum  Confirmationis  sus- 
cipiat." 

Such  is  the  text  of  the  decree,  extracted  by  the 
writer  in  the  Civilta  Cattolica  from  the  archives  of 
the  Holy  Office.  It  differs  considerably  from  that 
given  by  Gasparri  in  his  pamphlet,  De  la  valeur  des 
Ordinations  Anglicanes,  p.  16,  who  also  prefixes  the 
petition  presented  by  Gordon,  as  if  it  formed  an 


274     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

integral  part  of  the  decree  itself.  In  the  text  as 
now  published  the  arguments  and  statements  of  the 
petition  are  briefly  summarized.  A  more  important, 
though  far  less  extensive,  variation  is  the  addition 
of  the  words  "  et  quibusdam  scripturis  .  .  .  consul- 
torum,"  which  are  curiously  interjected  in  the  sen- 
tence "  Delata  instantia  .  .  .  qua  petebat."  There 
is  nothing  corresponding  to  this  in  the  text  given 
by  Gasparri,  which  merely  has  "  Lecto  supradicto 
memoriali  [i.e.,  Gordon's  petition]  Sanctissimus 
D.N.  Papa  praedictus  auditis  votis,  etc."  The 
decree,  as  so  read,  implied  that  the  decision  was 
based  solely  on  the  statements  made  by  Gordon 
himself,  which  included  the  most  fanciful  rendering 
of  the  Nag's  Head  Fable,  and  an  extraordinary 
statement  that  the  essential  form  in  the  English 
rite  was  :  "  Accipe  potestatem  praedicandi  verbum 
Dei,  et  administrandi  sancta  eius  sacramenta." 
This  being  so,  the  value  of  the  decree  itself  was 
naturally  put  no  higher  than  that  of  the  reasons  on 
which  it  was  based.  But,  as  I  have  explained  else- 
where, we  had  already  learnt  that  the  decision 
was  not  based  exclusively,  or  even  mainly,  on 
Gordon's  petition  ;  there  was  an  independent  in- 
quiry. This  statement  was  confirmed  by  what  we 
read  in  the  recent  Bull.  It  is  confirmed  afresh  by 
the  newly  published  text  of  the  decree.  There 
were  brought  into  the  case  quaedam  scripturae  sen 
iura  alias  collecta  pro  simili  casu. 

The  information,  however,  which  I  had  gathered 
from  various  sources,  and  which  I  have  published 
in  the  Contemporary,  appears  to  be  inexact  in  one 
particular.  There  is  no  trace  of  any  independent 
inquiry  at  the  time  when  the  Gordon  case  actually 


SOURCES  OF   BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     275 

came  on.1  The  new  elements  alias  collecta  had 
been  already  gathered  for  use  in  dealing  with  a 
previous  case,  when,  however,  no  formal  decision 
had  been  given.  This  was  the  case,  alluded  to  in 
the  recent  Bull,  which  came  before  the  Holy  Office 
in  1684.  As  described  by  the  writer  in  the  Civilta, 
this  case  concerned  "a  young  Calvinist  heretic,  who, 
passing  from  France  into  England,  was  there  or- 
dained to  the  diaconate  and  then  to  the  presbyterate, 
by  the  pseudo-bishop  of  London,  according  to  the 
use  of  that  sect.  The  young  man,  returning  to 
France  and  embracing  the  Catholic  religion,  wished 
to  marry.  He  accordingly  asked  whether  the  orders 
he  had  received  were  valid,  and  so  constituted  an 
impediment  to  his  marriage."  The  consultors  of 
the  Holy  Office  resolved  as  follows  : — "  Feria  II. 
die  13  Augusti  1685  DD.  CC.  mature  discusso 
dubio  unanimi  voto  responderunt  pro  invaliditate 
praedictae  ordinationis.  An  autem  expediat  ad 
hanc  declarationem  in  praesenti  casu  devenire  EE. 
PP.,  oraculo  reliquerunt."  The  Cardinals  of  the 
Congregation  judged  it  inopportune  to  pronounce 
on  the  case  at  that  juncture,  and  so  the  decision 
was  Dilata. 

The  vota  and  the  Acts  of  this  case,  our  informant 
says,  were  the  scripturae  et  iura  imported  into  the 
Gordon  case.  It  was  not  in  1704,  but  in  1684, 
that  investigations  were  made  by  Genetti  and 
others,  the  results  of  which  were  brought  to  bear 

1  Replying  to  me  in  the  second  edition  of  his  Condanna  delle  Ord. 
Agl.  (p.  40),  Fr.  Brandi,  the  writer  of  the  article  in  the  Civiltd,, 
corrected  this  by  a  reference  to  the  words  "  duobus  vel  tribus  novis 
votis,"  quoted  below.  But  I  do  not  gather  that  any  fresh  information 
was  forthcoming  ;  the  new  -vota  were  perhaps  opinions  newly  passed 
upon  the  old  materials. 


276     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

upon  Gordon's  petition.  I  gather  from  the  Civilta 
that  no  fresh  materials  of  any  kind,  except  the 
petition  itself,  were  brought  into  the  case  in  I7O41 ; 
but,  as  the  Pope  says  in  the  recent  Bull,  "  Eadem 
acta  repetita  et  ponderata  sunt."  Of  these  Acta 
the  writer  gives  us  some  glimpses,  provokingly 
brief  and  incomplete.  He  tells  us  that  the  stories 
about  Parker's  consecration  are  positively  excluded 
from  among  the  reasons  of  the  decision,  because 
it  is  repeatedly  asserted  that  "in  so  grave  a  matter 
a  resolution  of  such  consequence  could  not  be 
grounded  on  a  fact  disputed  between  Catholics  and 
Protestants,"  and  the  "  definite  (adeguata)  decision 
ought  to  be  connected  not  with  the  facts  of  Parker's 
case,  which  depended  upon  a  very  confused  (assai 
imbrogliata)  story  .  .  .  but  upon  the  defect  of 
intention,  and  of  the  words  used  by  the  Anglican 
heretics  in  priestly  ordination."  This,  however,  is 
a  very  different  thing  from  saying  that  the  fables 
in  question  had  no  influence  upon  the  judgment  of 
the  Consultors  or  of  the  Congregation.  Such 
language  is  perfectly  consistent  with  a  personal 
belief  in  the  truth  of  the  stories.  Still  quoting,  as 
I  gather,  from  a  report  of  the  proceedings  of  1684, 
presented  to  the  commission  of  1704,  the  writer 
adds  that  "the  principal  subject  of  discussion  was 
the  examination  of  the  Edwardine  form,  which 
was  in  use  for  more  than  a  hundred  years,  and  of 
the  same  form,  as  changed  under  Charles  II  in 
1662,"  and  that  in  the  course  of  this  examination 
the  forms  employed  by  the  Easterns,  whether 
Catholic  or  heretic,  were  brought  into  comparison. 
In  1704,  he  continues,  quoting  now  in  Latin  : — 
1  But  see  the  note  on  the  preceding  page. 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     277 

"  Duobus  vel  tribus  no  vis  votis  fuit  denuo  demon- 
strata  nullitas  istarum  ordinationum,  potissimum 
ex  insufficientia  formae." 

This  sort  of  information  is  interesting,  but  all  is 
very  vague  and  unsatisfying.  If  we  are  told  so 
much,  why  are  we  not  told  more  ?  What  was 
actually  regarded  as  the  essential  form,  the  insuffi- 
ciency of  which  was  fatal  to  the  English  ordinations? 
The  writer  keeps  to  the  same  studied  vagueness 
when  he  approaches  the  question  of  the  Tradition 
of  the  Instruments.  The  documents  which  he  has 
before  him  prove,  he  says,  that  "  if  the  question  was 
touched" — a  curiously  conditional  sort  of  statement 
— "  this  was  done,  not  to  prove  an  essential  defect 
in  itself,  but  only  to  show  that,  along  with  the  lack 
of  this,  there  lacked  entirely  all  determination  of 
the  words  employed  in  \.\\eform,  and  all  designation 
of  the  pozver  which  it  was  intended  to  confer." 
When  a  statement  of  this  kind  is  made  we  are 
compelled,  in  the  absence  of  fuller  information,  to 
read  between  the  lines.  We  may  err  in  doing  so, 
but  if  we  err  we  may  be  corrected  by  the  produc- 
tion of  further  evidence. 

What,  then,  does  the  information  before  us 
amount  to  ?  That  can  be  very  simply  summarized. 
The  Ordinal  was  examined  ;  the  essential  form  was 
found  to  be  indeterminate,  and  insufficient. 

The  crucial  question  remains  unanswered.  WThat 
was  taken  to  be  the  essential  form?  Until  this 
question  is  answered  it  remains  impossible  to  esti- 
mate the  value  of  the  decision.  Is  there  anything 
in  the  information  given  from  which  we  may  infer 
an  answer?  Something  issues  from  a  close  and 
careful  study. 


278     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

I  note  in  the  first  place  that  Gordon  himself  in 
his  petition  made  a  certain  identification  of  the 
form.  "  Nulla  enim  materia  utuntur,  nisi  forte 
traditione  Bibliorum,  nulla  forma  legitima ;  imo 
formam  Catholicorum  abiecere  et  commutavere  in 
hanc  :  Accipe  potestatem  praedicandi  verbuni  Dei,  et 
administrandi  sancta  eius  sacramenta :  quae  essen- 
tialiter  differt  a  formis  orthodoxis." 

It  is  clear,  then,  what  Gordon  took  to  be  the 
essential  form.  He  says  nothing  about  the  prayers 
or  the  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum.  There  can  be 
no  question,  either,  what  he  took  to  be  the  form 
of  presbyteral  ordination  according  to  the  Roman 
rite.  It  was  Accipe  potestatem  ojferre  sacrificium, 
etc.,  which  alone  could  by  any  stretch  of  language 
be  said  to  have  been  changed  \K\.Q  Accipe  potestatem 
praedicandi,  etc.  It  is  also  noticeable  that  he  makes 
no  allusion  to  the  imposition  of  hands  as  the  matter. 
But  does  this  represent  merely  the  personal  opinion 
of  Gordon  ?  Estcourt  has  well  remarked  that  a 
petition  such  as  his  would  not  be  drawn  up  by  the 
party  himself.  It  was  a  formal  document,  and 
would  certainly  be  drafted  by  an  official  familiar 
with  the  practice  of  the  Roman  Court.  The 
motivum,  even  if  it  included  some  matter  supplied 
by  the  petitioner,  would  follow  the  opinions  domin- 
ant at  Rome.  It  is,  then,  at  least  probable  that 
the  opinion  about  the  English  form,  set  forth  in  the 
petition,  was  prevalent  in  the  official  world  of 
Rome.  But  a  full  investigation  of  the  English 
Ordinal  had  taken  place  twenty  years  earlier.  Was 
this  opinion  the  outcome  of  that  investigation?  It 
seems  highly  probable.  One  expression  used  in 
the  petition  adds  to  the  probability.  The  English 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLIC AE  CURAE     279 

form,  thus  understood,  differs,  it  is  said,  a  formis 
orthodoxis.  It  is  contrasted,  not  with  the  Roman 
form  alone,  but  with  all  others  recognized  in  the 
Church.  But  in  1684,  as  we  have  seen,  the  English 
Ordinal  was  brought  into  comparison  with  the 
Eastern  rites :  an  opinion  which  describes  the 
English  form  specifically  as  differing  essentially 
from  all  orthodox  forms,  obviously  suggests  a 
reference  to  that  investigation. 

Again,  the  insufficiency  of  the  form  seems, 
according  to  our  information,  to  have  been  some- 
how connected  with  the  lack  of  the  Tradition  of 
the  Instruments.  This  indicates  obscurely,  but  not 
doubtfully,  that  the  form  under  consideration  was 
one  corresponding  to  the  Accipe  potestatem,  etc., 
of  the  Roman  rite ;  and  this,  as  I  have  said,  could 
be  none  other  but  that  put  forward  by  Gordon : 
"  Take  thou  authority  to  preach  the  Word  of  God, 
and  to  minister  the  holy  sacraments  in  the  congre- 
gation, where  thou  shalt  be  lawfully  appointed 
thereunto."  If  this  was  the  form  before  the  in- 
vestigators there  is  no  wonder  that  they  found 
it  lacking  in  determination,  and  in  the  proper 
designation  of  the  power  of  the  priesthood  which 
it  was  intended  to  confer. 

Reading  thus  between  the  lines  of  the  informa- 
tion given  us,  I  seem  to  find  that  the  Holy  Office 
in  1684  and  1704  took  as  the  essential  form  in  the 
English  rite  neither  any  one  of  the  prayers,  nor 
the  formula  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  etc.,  nor  the 
blessing  Almighty  God  Who  hath  given  you  this 
will,  etc.  (which  was  taken  as  the  form  by  Billuart), 
but  the  formula  Take  thou  authority  to  preach,  etc. 
If  this  be  the  form  which  was  judged  insufficient, 


28o     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

we  have  the  great  advantage  of  being  in  perfect 
accord  with  the  Sacred  Congregation,  and  we  may 
simply  set  aside  the  consequent  condemnation  of 
the  English  ordinations  as  based  on  an  error  of 
fact.1 

The  inference  is  not  intrinsically  improbable. 
The  opinion  was  still  dominant  in  the  Roman 
schools  that  the  essential  matter  of  presbyteral 
ordination  was  the  Tradition  of  the  Instruments, 
with  or  without  the  imposition  of  hands,  and  the 
essential  form  the  words  Accipe  potestatem  offerre, 
etc.  Such  was  the  opinion  of  de  Lugo,  who  was 
reckoned  the  greatest  of  modern  theologians ;  it 
reigned  almost  without  dispute  in  the  Sorbonne ; 
the  Thomists  were  pledged  to  it.  Morinus,  it  is 

1  Father  Brandi  (pp.  cit.  p.  47)  replied  expressly  under  this  head  by 
referring  to  "  la  forma  esaminata  al  tempo  di  Paolo  IV,"  i.e.  the  form 
set  out  in  the  Description  of  the  Ordinal  reproduced  above,  pp.  181-4. 
The  same  rite,  he  adds,  with  the  modifications  made  in  1662,  was 
examined  afresh  in  1684-5.  No  doubt ;  but  the  sixteenth  century 
Description  sets  out  Accipe  auctoritatetn  praedicandi,  etc.,  side  by 
side  with  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,  etc.,  and  does  not  in  any  way  in- 
dicate which  of  them  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  "  forma  essentialis." 
So  too  are  set  out  the  two  forms  used  in  the  consecration  of  a  bishop, 
Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,  etc.,  and  Attende  lectioni,  etc.  There  is 
nothing  here  to  show  which  was  considered  the  essential  form  in 
1684-5,  and  so  my  question  remains  unanswered.  "  Abbiamo  voluto 
cio  notare,"  says  Father  Brandi,  "affine  di  soddisfare  al  dubbio 
proposto  dal  Signer  Lacey  nel  Guardian."  He  must  credit  me  with 
a  rare  simplicity.  For  the  opinion  of  Duchesne  and  others  who  had 
access  to  the  documents,  see  above  pp.  48,  100,  128,  and  135.  Their 
judgment  that  the  Congregation  regarded  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum 
as  the  essential  form  is  not  lightly  to  be  set  aside,  but  was  it  anything 
more  than  a  probable  inference  from  doubtful  evidence  ?  I  myself 
had  the  privilege  of  perusing  the  materials  collected  by  Canon  Moyes 
from  the  dossier  of  the  case  ;  but  I  did  not  fully  realise  their  import- 
ance, and  made  no  notes  of  them.  It  seems  probable  that  Father 
Brandi  has  produced  all  that  is  relevant,  and  this  leaves  the  conclusion 
doubtful. 


SOURCES  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE     281 

true,  had  shown  conclusively  that  all  Eastern  ordi- 
nations, and  all  the  more  ancient  ordinations  of  the 
West,  had  been  validly  conferred  by  prayer  and 
imposition  of  hands  ;  but  the  immediate  result  of 
his  work  was  only  to  strengthen  the  opinion  of 
those  who  held  that  the  form  and  matter  were 
different  for  the  East  and  for  the  West.  Some 
years  after  the  Gordon  case  was  decided,  Hardouin 
still  held  this  opinion  as  almost  axiomatic,  while 
disfiguring  it  in  his  own  fashion  with  a  fantastic 
theory  of  a  double  divine  appointment.  Benedict  XIV 
was,  I  believe,  the  first  theologian  who  seriously 
shook  its  credit ;  and  even  he  did  this  while  actually 
recording  a  decision  of  the  Congregation  of  the 
Council  which  required  its  recognition,  in  the  specific 
form  put  forward  by  de  Lugo,  as  at  least  probable. 
Even  if  the  Congregation  of  the  Holy  Office  in 
1684-1704  was  enlightened  beyond  the  measure 
of  the  time — a  very  unlikely  supposition  —  and 
put  aside  the  Tradition  of  the  Instruments  as  not 
essential,  it  remains  probable  in  the  highest  degree 
that  they  regarded  Accipe  potestatem  offerre  as 
the  essential  form  of  presbyteral  ordination  in  the 
Latin  rite,  and  finding  a  formula  Accipe  potestatem 
etc.  in  the  English  rite,  took  that  as  a  matter  of 
course  to  be  the  essential  form. 

The  inference,  then,  is  not  intrinsically  improb- 
able, and  it  seems  to  follow  from  the  information 
which  is  given  us.  If  it  be  erroneous,  let  the 
error  be  shown.  The  archives  of  the  Holy  Office 
either  contain  the  necessary  evidence  or  they  do 
not.  If  it  is  there,  let  us  have  it.  The  Roman 
authorities  presumably  wish  to  convince  us. 
Evidence  alone  will  have  that  effect.  If  nothing 


282     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

more  is  produced  we  shall  be  disposed  to  assume 
either  that  the  archives  contain  nothing  to  the 
purpose,  or  that  what  they  contain  would  rather 
confirm  us  in  our  opinion  than  convince  us  of 
error.1 

1  The  purport  of  the  concluding  sentence  may  not  be  very  clear. 
Its  form  was  certainly  affected  by  the  habit  of  thought  then  domina- 
ting me,  which  is  described  above  in  the  Introduction  ;  but  even  at 
the  time  the  possible  "error"  of  which  I  was  thinking  was  nothing 
else  but  a  mistake  about  the  actual  details  of  the  decision  in  Gordon's 
case. 


THE   THEOLOGY  OF  THE   BULL 
APOSTOLICAE  CURAE 


X 

THE  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  BULL 
APOSTOLICAE   CURAE 

(A  paper  read  at  Sion  College,  on  Tuesday,  November 
roth,  1896) 

IT  is  natural  to  ask  how  we  should  regard  the 
Papal  Bull  on  English  Orders.  You  may 
lightly  answer  that  we  should  regard  it  with  perfect 
indifference,  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  and  his 
opinions  and  judgments  are  nothing  to  us,  that  we 
may  pass  them  by  with  silent  contempt.  But  I 
think  such  an  answer  will  not  give  you  permanent 
satisfaction.  It  will  occur  to  you  that  Christians  are 
all  members  one  of  another,  that,  however  much  we 
may  be  sundered  by  controversy  and  by  differences 
of  practice,  we  are  all  members  of  the  one  Body  of 
Christ,  and  the  interests  that  we  have  in  common 
are  far  more  and  far  greater  than  those  which 
divide  us.  Among  these  common  interests  there  is 
none  greater  than  the  defence  of  the  truth ;  and 
among  Christian  truths  there  are  few  more  im- 

o 

portant  than  the  truth  of  the  sacred  ministry — that 
ministry  of  reconciliation  which  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  intrusted  to  the  Apostles  for  the  perfecting 
of  the  saints,  for  the  edifying  of  the  Body  of  Christ. 
This  ministry  is  spread  throughout  the  Church,  and 

285 


286     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

upon  the  testimony  of  the  whole  Church  we  rely 
for  our  understanding  of  its  nature  and  attributes. 
The  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  faith  are  attested 
by  the  common  teaching  of  all  parts  of  the  Church, 
so  that  no  teaching  which  is  denied  or  even  ignored 
by  a  considerable  part  of  the  Church  can  be  recog- 
nized with  certainty  as  being  true  to  the  original 
type.  In  the  same  way  the  reality  of  the  sacred 
ministry  is  attested  by  its  existence  in  all  parts  of 
the  Church  alike.  Any  serious  divergence,  there- 
fore, between  different  parts  of  the  Church  endangers 
the  hold  of  all  upon  the  truth.  We  in  England 
know  only  too  well  what  mischief  is  done  by 
disputes  about  the  reality  of  a  ministry  confessedly 
new  and  constituted  by  men  who  have  separated 
themselves  from  the  Church.  Much  greater  is  the 
confusion  when  the  ministry  which  one  part  of  the 
Church  claims  to  have  received  by  direct  succession 
from  the  Apostles  is  denounced  by  another  part  of 
the  Church  as  a  mere  empty  shadow. 

That  is  how  the  matter  stands.  The  English 
Church  claims  the  possession  and  use  of  a  sacred 
ministry,  a  holy  priesthood,  which  is  common  to  the 
whole  Church,  which  is,  therefore,  identical  with 
that  of  the  Roman  Church.  Futile  distinctions 
have  at  times  been  drawn  by  men  whose  dislike  of 
everything  Roman  has  warped  their  judgment ; 
but  the  testimony  of  the  Church  as  a  whole  is 
unmistakable.  In  the  Preface  to  the  Ordinal  is 
expressed  the  intention  of  retaining  and  continuing 
the  orders  which  were  conferred  before  the 
Reformation,  and  none  will  question  their  identity 
with  those  of  the  Roman  Church.  Priests  ordained 
by  the  Roman  rite  have  always,  in  spite  of  the 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    287 

fierce  protests  of  the  early  Puritans,  been  recog- 
nized in  practice  as  sharing  the  same  ministry  with 
us.  The  late  Primate  in  his  last  message  to  the 
English  people  restated  this  obvious  truth.  The 
Orders  of  the  English  Church  are  identical  with 
those  of  the  Roman  Church.  But  the  head  of  the 
Roman  Church  declares  them  to  be  null. 

Such  a  declaration  was  mischievous  enough  when 
it  was  supposed  to  deal  only  with  a  matter  of  fact. 
Until  lately  the  authorities  of  the  Roman  Church 
apparently  held  that  in  the  English  Church  real 
Orders  were  not  in  fact  conferred,  but  no  reasons 
for  the  denial  were  publicly  given.  Individual 
theologians  might  suggest  reasons,  but  they  had  no 
authority.  Others,  again,  were  able  to  combat  the 
denial  by  showing  that  there  were  no  reasons  at  all 
on  which  to  ground  it.  This  is  now  changed. 
The  Bull  not  only  declares  English  Orders  null,  but 
gives  a  reason.  And  the  reason  given  is  that  the 
forms  used  in  conferring  them  are  worthless  ;  they 
were  deliberately  chosen  to  express  an  altogether 
inadequate  conception  of  the  sacred  ministry. 
This  is  a  far  more  mischievous  declaration  than  the 
former.  It  is  one  thing  to  say  that  a  part  of  the 
Christian  Church,  through  some  untoward  accident, 
lacks  a  valid  ministry  ;  it  is  a  far  more  serious  thing 
to  say  that  a  part  of  the  Church  has  deliberately 
wrecked  the  Christian  priesthood.  In  saying  this 
you  break  up  the  testimony  of  the  whole  Church  to 
the  truth  of  the  sacred  ministry.  If  the  charge  be 
true,  you  must  face  that  consequence  unflinchingly. 
If  the  charge  be  false,  then  you  are  responsible  for 
the  confusion  of  thought  which  ensues.  To  accuse 
a  man  falsely  of  heresy  is  not  only  an  injustice  to 


288     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

him,  it  imperils  the   truth   which   he  has  actually 
taught. 

We  know  the  charge  against  the  English  Church 
to  be  false.  We  can  see  the  harm  that  will  come 
from  it.  We  may  hold  the  Roman  Church  re- 
sponsible. But  we  are  not  on  that  account  without 
further  interest  in  the  matter.  We  may  be  unshaken 
ourselves  ;  but  we  have  not  ourselves  only  to  think 
of.  Perhaps  we  are  satisfied  that  the  Roman 
Church  will  suffer  most.  Are  we  to  congratulate 
ourselves  on  this  ?  I  would  remind  you  of  the 
wise  and  noble  words  spoken  on  this  head  by  the 
Bishop  of  Rochester  at  the  late  Church  Congress. 
If  the  Roman  Church  suffers  the  whole  Church 
suffers,  and  we  suffer  who  are  members  of  that  one 
Body. 

I  shall  not  on  this  occasion  take  up  the  cudgels  in 
defence  of  the  English  ordinations.  A  question  of 
even  greater  importance  is  stirred  by  the  recent 
Bull.  It  is  not  only  a  personal  matter  for  us  English 
Churchmen.  There  is  a  truth  at  stake.  What  is 
Holy  Order  ?  I  will  call  it  a  sacrament,  if  you  will 
not  misunderstand  me.  I  will  call  it,  with  Hooker 
a  xap'^Ma  or  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  its  effect 
a  certain  mark  or  character  indelibly  impressed  upon 
the  recipient.  I  will  say,  with  Jeremy  Taylor,  that 
in  ordination  is  conferred  a  twofold  grace  of 
sanctification,  by  which,  on  the  one  hand,  the 
recipient  is  separated  for  the  work  of  the  ministry, 
and,  on  the  other,  he  is  rendered  capable  of  worthily 
fulfilling  his  vocation.  I  will  say  with  the  whole 
Church  that  this  grace  is  given  by  an  outward  sign, 
by  public  prayer  with  imposition  of  hands.  When 
we  have  said  this,  the  question  whether  ordination 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    289 

ought  to  be  called  a  sacrament  is  a  mere  question  of 
words. 

If  the  grace  of  the  ministry  is  a  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  conferred  by  a  sacramental  sign,  what  are 
the  powers  of  the  Church  in  this  regard  ?  The 
Church  can  but  act  ministerially.  The  Church,  in 
the  person  of  a  bishop,  can  give  or  withhold  the 
grace  of  the  ministry  by  imparting  to  a  man  or  refus- 
ing him  the  external  sign.  But  when  once  the  grace 
has  been  given  the  Church  cannot  take  back  the 
gift.  It  is  as  with  baptism.  The  Church  may  give 
a  man  baptism,  or  for  a  good  cause  may  refuse  it. 
But  once  he  is  baptized  the  Church  cannot  undo  his 
baptism.  Neither,  on  the  other  hand,  if  he  has  not 
been  properly  baptized,  can  the  Church  by  any  sort 
of  decree  produce  in  him  the  effect  of  baptism.1 
The  Church  can  only  inquire  into  the  facts  of  the 
case,  and  when  the  facts  are  known  declare  that 
as  a  matter  of  fact  the  man  is  or  is  not  baptized. 
A  priest,  as  representing  the  Church,  does  this 
whenever  a  child  is  brought  to  him  after  being 
privately  baptized.  He  holds  a  formal  inquiry, 
takes  evidence,  and  declares  the  result.  It  is  the 
same  with  ordination.  The  Church  can  inquire 
whether  a  man  has  been  properly  ordained  or  no, 
and  may  be  able  to  decide  the  fact  upon  the 
evidence.  But  no  decision  can  alter  the  facts.  A 
defective  ordination  cannot  be  made  good,  a  valid 

1  Yet  the  practice  /car'  OIKOVO/J.IO.V  of  the  Eastern  Church  is  not  to 
be  ignored.  The  wise  decretal  of  Innocent  III  de  presbytero  non 
baptizato  is  another  matter  :  "  Respondemus  presbyterum,  quern  sine 
unda  baptismatis  extremum  diem  clausisse  significasti,  quia  in  sanctae 
matris  Ecclesiae  fide  et  Christi  nominis  confessione  perseveraverit,  ab 
originali  peccato  solutum,  et  caelestis  patriae  gaudium  esse  adeptum, 
asserimus  incunctanter."  Lib.  Ill  Deer,  tit.  43,  cap.  2.  Denzinger, 
Enchiridion,  No.  343. 

V 


29o     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

ordination  cannot  be  annulled,  by  any  subsequent 
decree. 

The  question  of  the  validity  of  baptism  is  usually 
a  simple  one,  though  difficult  cases  do  sometimes 
occur.  It  is  simple  because  the  principal  conditions 
of  a  true  baptism  were  ordained  by  our  Lord  him- 
self, and  so  are  undoubtedly  required.  He  taught 
the  necessity  of  baptism  by  water,  and  he  taught 
his  Church  to  baptize  In  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  In  the 
language  of  theologians  he  thus  appointed  specifi- 
cally the  matter  and  the  form  of  baptism.  If 
this  matter  and  this  form  were  not  used  we  decide 
at  once  that  there  was  no  true  Christian  baptism.1 

For  ordination,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  no 
clear  evidence  that  our  Lord  himself  appointed 
any  specific  matter  or  form.  We  may  think  it 
probable  that  he  did  so,  and  since  probability  is 
the  chief  guide  of  life  we  shall  be  careful  to  act 
on  this  view ;  we  should  not  dare  to  ordain  a  man 
without  using  that  matter  and  form  which  our  Lord 
may  have  appointed.  But  there  is  no  certainty  of 
this,  and  therefore  a  decision  about  the  validity  of 
an  ordination  is  far  less  simple  than  one  concerning 
baptism.  You  can  never  say  curtly  and  definitely — 
"  Certain  things  are  absolutely  required  by  the 
teaching  of  Christ  for  a  valid  ordination.  This  man 
was  ordained  without  those  requisites.  Therefore 
his  ordination  is  null  and  void." 

What,  then,   can   the   Church  decide  in  such  a 

1  But  see  Nicholas  I,  Responsa  ad  Consulta  Bulgarorum,  cap.  104  : 
"  Hi  profecto  si  in  nomine  sanctae  Trinitatis  vel  tantum  in  Christi 
nomine,  sicut  in  Actibus  Apostolorum  legimus,  baptizati  sunt  (unum 
quippe  idemque  est,  ut  sanctus  exponit  Ambrosius),  constat  eos  non 
esse  denuo  baptizandos." 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    291 

case?  It  can  be  ruled  with  perfect  certainty  that 
a  given  ordination  is  good  and  valid.  If  it  be 
found  on  inquiry  that  a  man  has  been  ordained 
in  a  way  which  the  Church  ordinarily  accounts 
sufficient,  it  is  clearly  impossible  to  go  behind  the 
facts.  He  may  at  once  be  pronounced  validly 
ordained.  But  if  the  ordination  has  been  effected 
in  a  manner  unusual  or  not  fully  recognized,  it  is 
not  so  simple  a  matter.  Such  an  ordination 
cannot  claim  immediate  acceptance  ;  but  neither 
can  it  be  at  once  declared  null.  The  form  em- 
ployed may  be  a  valid  one,  though  unusual.  An 
inquiry  is  called  for.  On  what  lines  should  it 
proceed  ?  What  sort  of  decision  can  be  looked 
for? 

Two  separate  questions  will  present  themselves. 
What  are  the  essential  elements  of  a  valid  ordina- 
tion ?  And  were  those  elements  duly  observed 
in  the  supposed  case  ?  The  former  question  raises 
a  very  great  difficulty.  The  essentials  of  a  valid 
ordination  have  never  been  defined.  We  know 
that  certain  forms  are  sufficient,  but  we  do  not 
know  whether  they  are  necessary,  or  whether  other 
forms  might  not  be  substituted.  Can  the  Church 
define  what  is  necessary,  so  as  to  rule  out  all 
ordinations  that  lack  any  part  of  it  ? 

There  is  a  difference  of  opinion  among  theo- 
logians which  bears  upon  this  question.  Some 
believe  that,  although  there  is  no  record  of  such 
appointment  in  the  Gospels,  yet  our  Lord  did 
really  appoint  a  proper  matter  and  form  of  ordina- 
tion, and  taught  the  Apostles  to  use  it.  Others 
believe  that  he  left  to  his  Church  the  power  to 
appoint  the  matter  and  form.  It  is  hard  to  say 


292     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

which  of  these  two  opinions  has  the  greater  weight 
of  authority  on  its  side. 

Take  the  former  hypothesis.  Then  the  essentials 
of  a  valid  ordination  are  what  our  Lord  appointed. 
The  Church  has  only  to  find  out  what  these  are  ; 
every  ordination  which  has  them  will  be  valid, 
every  ordination  which  lacks  them  will  be  void.  But 
how  are  they  to  be  found  ?  How  can  we  recover 
any  teaching  of  our  Lord  which  has  not  been 
recorded  ?  We  may  study  the  practice  of  the 
Apostles.  What  their  Lord  taught  them  to  do  they 
certainly  did.  If  he  commanded  them  to  ordain 
men  to  the  sacred  ministry  in  a  certain  way,  they 
would  undoubtedly  do  it  in  that  way  and  no  other. 
But  we  find  the  Apostles  ordaining  by  imposition 
of  hands,  with  prayer.  The  same  mode  of  ordain- 
ing was  continued  in  the  Church  and  remained 
in  use  without  variation  or  addition  for  several 
hundred  years.  So  far  as  Christian  antiquity  has 
been  explored  no  other  kind  of  ordination  is  found.1 
In  the  greater  part  of  the  Eastern  Church  there 
is  nothing  else  to  this  day,  and  in  the  Western 
Church,  while  many  additions  have  been  made  to 
the  rites  of  ordination,  the  old  elements  remain 
side  by  side  with  the  new.  There  is  no  ordination 
without  prayer  and  imposition  of  hands.  If  then 
our  Lord  prescribed  any  mode  of  ordaining,  it  must 
have  been  this.  But  further,  it  may  be  asked  what 
sort  of  prayer  was  required?  It  is  clear  that  no 
fixed  form  was  appointed,  since  there  is  great 
variety  among  those  which  the  Church  has  used. 

1  I  had  not  forgotten  my  own  studies  in  the  consecration  of 
bishops  with  imposition  of  the  Gospel  text  (supra,  pp.  7,  16),  but  was 
only  stating  an  hypothesis  which  I  myself  rejected. 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    293 

Is  there  no  limit  then  ?  May  any  prayer  be  used  ? 
Can  holy  orders  be  conferred,  for  example,  by  the 
recitation  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  with  imposition  of 
hands  ?  Again  we  look  to  the  practice  of  the 
Church.  We  find  that  in  all  the  prayers  that  have 
been  used,  widely  as  they  differ,  there  is  a  common 
element.  This  common  element  may  be  very 
briefly  expressed.  There  is  a  prayer  for  the 
ordinand  that  he  may  receive  the  grace  necessary 
for  the  worthy  accomplishment  of  the  duties  of 
the  order  to  which  he  is  called.  This  we  find 
in  all  the  prayers,  and  therefore  we  may  suppose  it 
necessary.  We  may  presume  that  our  Lord  com- 
manded such  a  prayer  to  be  used.  But,  after  all, 
this  is  only  a  presumption,  and  it  is  based  on 
imperfect  evidence.  We  do  not  possess  all  the 
prayers  which  were  ever  used  in  the  Church  for 
conferring  Orders.  Should  more  of  them  come  to 
light,  we  may  possibly  find  these  lacking  some  part 
of  what  we  have  thought  universal  and  essential. 
The  possibility  has  been  recently  illustrated.  A 
distinguished  French  theologian,  M.  Boudinhon,  in 
view  of  the  controversy  about  English  Orders,  lately 
undertook  the  very  task  that  I  am  describing.  He 
compared  all  the  known  prayers  of  ordination  recog- 
nized as  valid  by  the  Roman  Church.  He  found  that 
all  contained  an  express  mention  of  the  order  to  be 
conferred.  He  therefore  took  this  to  be  essential. 
Soon  after  he  had  published  the  result  of  his  studies, 
I  pointed  out  to  him  that  he  had  left  out  of  count 
the  ordination  prayers  contained  in  the  Canons  of 
Hippolytus,  which  were  in  use  at  Rome  during  the 
third  century.  Of  these  the  prayer  for  a  deacon 
has  no  mention  of  the  diaconate.  M.  Boudinhon 


294    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

at  once  admitted  that  his  conclusion  must  be 
modified ;  the  mention  of  the  order  could  not  be 
required  as  essential.1 

The  weakness  of  the  method  pursued  by  M. 
Boudinhon  is  evident.  He  was  building  on  im- 
perfect evidence ;  and  it  is  hard  to  see  how  the 
evidence  can  ever  be  completed.  You  can  never 
get  beyond  a  presumption  that  certain  things  were 
prescribed  by  our  Lord  as  essential  to  a  valid 
ordination.  You  may  take  it  for  certain  that  the 
ordinations  used  in  the  Church  do  really  contain 
what  the  Lord  commanded ;  but  you  cannot  be 
sure  that  any  particular  element  in  them  was  so 
required.  Something  which  is  common  to  them  all 
may  nevertheless  have  been  added  by  human 
authority.  On  the  hypothesis  of  a  matter  and  form 
appointed  by  Christ  himself,  it  is  safe  to  declare 
an  ordination  valid  because  it  conforms  to  the  usage 
of  the  Church  ;  but  any  judgment  must  be  highly 
precarious  which  condemns  an  ordination  as  void 
for  lack  of  something  which  may  not  after  all  be 
essential. 

1  Achelis,  p.  66.  I  would  not  now  assert  the  Roman  character  of 
these  Canons.  In  his  Condanna  delle  Ordinazioni  Anglicane  (p.  53), 
Father  Brandi  pointed  out  that  the  word  seruitiutn  in  Achelis' 
rendering  may  represent  an  orginal  d<-a.Kovia.v.  This  critic  handled 
both  M.  Boudinhon  and  me  rather  severely,  and  not  unjustly,  for 
arguing  from  a  Latin  translation  made  by  a  German  from  an  Arabic 
version  of  a  lost  Greek  original.  I  kiss  the  rod  ;  but  I  do  not  know 
why  my  castigator  himself  underlined  the  words  Diaconus  and 
Diaconaius  in  this  same  doubtful  translation.  They  occur  in  the 
text  of  the  Canon  ;  we  were  concerned,  of  course,  only  with  the 
wording  of  the  Prayer  of  Ordination  which  the  Canon  contains. 
The  incident  retains  its  interest  as  illustrating  the  precariousness  of 
an  argument  drawn  from  a  necessarily  imperfect  collation  of  the  rites 
used  in  the  Church.  Indeed,  Father  Brandi's  criticism  enhances  its 
interest ;  for  here  is  confessedly  a  form  of  ordination  probably  used 
in  the  Church,  the  exact  wording  of  which  cannot  be  recovered.  See 
also  Introduction,  pp.  14-17. 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    295 

Let  us  pass  to  the  second  hypothesis.     We  are 
now  to  suppose  that  our  blessed  Lord  intrusted  to 
his   Church    the   power  of  appointing  the   matter 
and  form  by  which  the  grace  of  the  ministry  was  to 
be  conferred.     We  stand  here  on  surer  ground,  for 
if  this   power  was  given   to  the   Church   it  seems 
clear    that    the   Apostles   exercised   it   when    they 
performed  their  first  ordination  with  prayer  and  the 
imposition  of  hands.     These  they  made  the  essen- 
tials of  ordination.      Then  it  would  seem  that  any 
ordination  conferred  in  this  manner,  with  suitable 
prayer  and  imposition  of  hands,  must  be  accepted 
as  valid.      But  a  further  question  arises.     Can  the 
Church,  after  appointing  the  essential  elements  of 
ordination,  change  them  and  appoint  others  in  their 
stead  ?     It  seems  a  not  unnatural  conclusion.     We 
can  hardly  suppose  the  powers  of  the   Church  to 
have  been  exhausted  by  the  first  exercise  of  them. 
Some  theologians  have  maintained  that  a  change 
of   this    kind   has    in    fact    been    made.      In    the 
Eastern   Church,  they  say,  the  priesthood   is  still 
conferred,  as  in  the  beginning,  by  prayer  and  the 
imposition  of  hands  ;  but  in  the  Western  Church 
there  has  been  substituted  the  Porrection  of  Instru- 
ments   with    the    accompanying    words,    "  Accipe 
potestatem  offerendi   sacrificium,   etc."     The  truth 
is  that  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  and  his  followers  did 
indeed  take  this  for  the  essential  matter  and  form 
of  priestly  ordination  ;  but  they  probably  supposed 
it  to  have  been  in  use  from  the  beginning.     With  a 
better  knowledge  of  Christian  antiquity  the  scholars 
of  a  later  age  detected  their  historical  mistake,  but 
the   great   authority    of    St.    Thomas    delayed    the 
rejection  of  his  theological  opinion,  and  therefore 


296     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

an  actual  change  of  the  matter  and  form  was 
insisted  upon.  This  raises  a  heavy  crop  of  difficul- 
ties. By  what  authority  can  such  a  change  be 
made  ?  Clearly  it  need  not  be  made  by  the  whole 
Church,  or  for  the  whole  Church  at  once.  What 
then  ?  May  any  individual  Bishop  change  the 
usual  matter  and  form,  and  substitute  another  at  his 
discretion  ?  Or  what  sort  of  intermediate  authority 
is  required  ?  Again,  if  a  new  matter  and  form  has 
been  introduced  by  competent  authority,  will  that 
deprive  the  old  matter  and  form  of  their  efficacy, 
so  that  Orders  conferred  by  them  will  be  no  longer 
valid  ?  The  most  learned  of  the  Popes,  Benedict 
XIV,  cuts  these  knots  in  a  summary  and,  I  think, 
a  satisfactory  manner  : — "  Even  if  such  power  has 
been  given  to  the  Church,"  he  says,  "  it  is  a  pure 
and  arbitrary  assumption  to  say  that  she  has  used 
it.  Where  and  when,  in  what  age,  in  what  Council, 
or  by  what  Pontiff,  has  any  such  change  been 
made  ?  " l  A  change  of  this  moment  could  only  be 
made  by  a  formal  legislative  act  of  the  Church  ; 
and  no  such  act  can  be  shown.2  Some  would  refer 
to  the  decree  Exultate,  in  which  Eugenius  IV 
denned  the  porrection  of  the  instruments  and  the 
accompanying  words  as  the  essential  matter  and 
form  of  priestly  ordination.  But  in  no  way  can 
this  definition  be  regarded  as  having  legislative 
force,  above  all  for  the  Western  Church.  It  was 

1  De  Syn.  Dioec.,  lib.  viii.  cap.  x.,  §  10. 

2  What  is  of  importance  is  not  the  question  whether  the  Church, 
or  a  part  of  the  Church,  has  power  to  introduce  a  new  mode  of 
ordination,  but  whether  it  is  possible  to  invalidate  a  mode  previously 
in  use.     On  the  hypothesis  under  discussion,  the  former  question 
seems  to  demand  an  affirmative  answer ;  the  latter  question  may  be 
answered  theoretically  in  the  affirmative,  but  there  is  no  ground  for 
supposing  such  a  power  to  have  been  exercised  in  practice. 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    297 

addressed  to  the  case  of  the  Armenians  who  were 
seeking  reconciliation  with  the  Roman  see ;  and 
Armenians  are  not  Westerns.  It  was  not  meant  to 
bring  in  a  new  custom,  for  it  is  a  definition,  accord- 
ing to  the  Pope's  mind,  of  what  is  and  always  has 
been  the  matter  and  form  of  Holy  Order.  Modern 
theologians  of  the  Roman  schools,  who  almost  all 
repudiate  this  definition,  labour  to  avoid  the  appear- 
ance of  contradicting  a  Papal  decision.  They 
speak  of  the  decree  as  dealing  only  with  the 
accessories  of  ordination,  or  as  merely  describing 
the  actual  Latin  rite.1  There  seems  no  ground 
whatever  for  attributing  to  it  legislative  force.  Nor 
is  there  anything  else  of  the  kind.  No  formal 
change  of  the  matter  and  form  of  ordination  can  be 
traced.  The  original  institution  therefore  stands. 
Imposition  of  hands  and  prayer  formally  constitute 
the  rite  of  ordination.  The  contents  of  the  prayer 
are  not  fixed,  for  the  prayers  used  in  the  Church  are 
known  to  have  varied  widely.  On  the  hypothesis 
which  I  am  now  considering  the  Church  might 
indeed  impose  a  certain  form,  and  make  it  necessary 
for  the  future.  But  such  a  step  must  be  taken  in 
the  most  formal  and  public  manner,  and  it  could  in 
no  case  affect  the  validity  of  Orders  conferred  in 
the  past.  We  are  thus  brought  almost  to  the  same 
position  in  which  the  former  hypothesis  landed  us. 
It  is  safe  to  declare  ordinations  valid  which  conform 
to  the  usual  pattern.  It  is  highly  precarious  to 
declare  an  ordination  void  on  the  ground  of  some- 
thing wanting  in  the  prayers  which  accompany  the 
imposition  of  hands. 

I  have  examined  these  two  hypotheses  at  length, 

1  Benedict  XIV,  ibid.  §  8.     Gasparri,  De  Sicr.  Ord.,  n.  1007. 


298     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

because   there    is   sometimes   a  danger  of  sliding 
imperceptibly  from  one  to  the  other,  and  the  natural 
result  is  much  confusion  of  thought.     The  essentials 
of  ordination  depend  either  upon  the  institution  of 
Christ,   or  upon   the   appointment  of  the   Church. 
In  either  case  the  practical  result  for  our  purpose  is 
much  the  same.      In  the  former  case  it  is  perhaps 
impossible  to  arrive  at  an  exhaustive  definition  of 
the  essentials.     In  the  latter  case  this  is  possible, 
but  it  has  never  been  done.     In  the  Roman  Church, 
and  in  all  the  Churches  that  bow  to  Rome,  this  fact 
has  usually  been    recognized.      In    the   Council  of 
Trent    care  was    taken    to    avoid   anything   which 
might  seem   to  be  such  a  definition.1     In  practice 
the  Roman  Church  allows  the  validity  of  ordina- 
tions conferred  by  all  manner  of  rites,  if  only  with 
prayer  and    the    imposition    of  hands.      In   conse- 
quence   of    a   succession    of    movements    towards 
reunion,   mostly  abortive,  the   Roman  Church  has 
had  occasion  to  accept  or  reject  Orders  conferred 
by  almost  every  known  rite  used  in  any  part  of  the 
Church,  orthodox  or  heretical ;  and  in  every  case 
save  one  such  Orders  have  been  acknowledged  as 
good.   The  one  exception,  I  need  not  tell  you,  is  that 
of  the  English  Church.     In  no  single  case  have  the 
ordinations  thus  accepted  any  resemblance  to  those 
of  the  Roman  Church  as  finally  developed  during 
the  middle  ages.     In  no  single  case,  as  the  great 
French  scholar  Morinus  testified,  could  any  matter 
and  form  be  found  in  them,  save  the  imposition  of 
hands  and  prayer  ;  and  the  Orders  so  conferred  have 
been  recognized  as  good.     The  prayers  thus  used 

1  The  subject  was  treated  in  the  Church  Quarterly  Review,  Vol.  V. 
See  also  Denny,  Anglican  Orders  and  J  urisdiction,  p.  193. 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    299 

are  very  diverse,  some  expressing  with  great 
fulness  the  characteristic  powers  of  the  various 
orders,  others  conceived  in  the  most  general  terms  ; 
some  alluding  more  or  less  clearly  to  the  power  of 
offering  the  eucharistic  sacrifice,  others  ignoring  it 
altogether.  I  have  already  mentioned  M.  Boudin- 
hon's  comparative  study  of  these  forms.  Carefully 
separating  what  is  common  to  all,  and  so  pre- 
sumably essential,  he  finds  that  it  amounts  to  this — 

"  Deus  qui  .  .  .  respice  propitius  super  hunc 
famulum  tuum,  quern  ad  diaconatum  (z^/presby- 
teratum,  vel  episcopatum,  sen  summum  sacerdo- 
tium)  vocare  dignatus  es  ;  da  ei  gratiam  tuam,  ut 
munera  huius  ordinis  digne  et  utiliter  adimplere 


valeat."1 


With  him  agrees  entirely  Mgr.  Gasparri,  who  notes 
also  that  many  of  the  rites  thus  recognized  are 
those  of  heretical  Churches,  probably  dating  from  a 
time  when  their  authors  had  already  broken  away 
from  the  unity  of  the  Church.  Thus  the  ordina- 
tions of  the  Nestorians,  of  the  Armenians,  and  of 
other  branches  of  the  Monophysites,  and  even  of 
the  barbarous  Church  of  Abyssinia,  have  been 
recognized  as  good,  without  any  inquiry  into  their 
origin.2  It  was  enough  that  they  were  effected  by 
a  rite  analogous  to  those  used  in  the  Catholic 
Church. 

It  was  put  to  me  by  a  distinguished  person  when 
I  was  in  Rome  that  there  was  a  practical  difficulty 

1  De  la  validite  des  Ord.  Angl.,  p.  50.     As  I  have  said,  he  after- 
wards modified  this,  no  longer  regarding  the  actual  naming  of  the 
order  necessary. 

2  Gasparri,  De  la  valeur  des  Ord.  Angl.,  p.  42. 


300    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

in  the  way  of  recognizing  English  Orders,  because 
that  could  not  be  done  without  defining  the  essen- 
tials of  ordination,  a  definition  from  which  the 
Roman  Church  had  always  shrunk.  I  pointed  out 
in  reply  that  there  was  no  such  need,  since  the 
English  Ordinal  certainly  contained  those  elements 
at  least  which  are  common  to  the  various  Eastern 
ordinations  recognized  at  Rome.  My  remark  was 
received  with  polite  incredulity  by  one  who,  how- 
ever eminent  in  his  own  way,  probably  knew  little 
of  the  English  Ordinal  and  less  of  the  Oriental  rites. 
His  attitude,  however,  is  instructive.  If  it  was 
impossible  to  recognize  English  Orders  without 
defining  the  essentials,  still  more  was  it  impossible 
without  such  a  definition  to  condemn  them  as  void. 
You  cannot  say  that  a  rite  lacks  essentials  unless 
you  first  determine  what  the  essentials  are.  And  if 
it  does  not  lack  essentials  it  is  valid. 

You  will,  perhaps,  take  me  up  here  with  a  demurrer. 
Is  it,  then,  impossible  for  the  Church  ever  to  pro- 
nounce any  ordination  invalid  ?  Must  everything 
be  accepted  which  its  authors  put  forward  as  a  rite 
of  ordination  ?  I  answer  that  it  would  be  extremely 
precarious  to  declare  absolutely  invalid  the  Orders 
conferred  by  any  bishop,  even  by  a  rite  of  his  own 
appointment,  and  that  the  Roman  Church  has  never 
done  this  except  in  dealing  with  England.  But 
short  of  this  the  authorities  of  the  Church  can  do 
much.  It  is  one  thing  to  have  genuine  Orders,  or 
Orders  which  may  possibly  be  genuine  ;  it  is  quite 
another  thing  to  have  the  right  to  exercise  them. 
It  may  be  difficult  or  impossible  to  declare  a  man's 
Orders  absolutely  void  ;  it  is  easy,  and  it  may  be 
right,  to  forbid  him  to  use  them.  If  they  are  doubtful, 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    301 

this  ought  to  be  done  ;  but  where  there  is  room  for 
doubt  there  is  room  for  conditional  reordination. 
The  internal  practice  of  the  Roman  Church  follows 
this  rule.  On  the  ground  that  some  theologians 
have  raised  a  doubt  whether  the  porrection  of 
instruments  be  not  in  the  Western  Church  essential 
to  a  valid  ordination,  the  Roman  Church  requires 
conditional  reordination,  if  by  accident  that  ceremony 
has  been  omitted.  On  the  same  principle  any 
particular  Church  might  lawfully  exclude  from  its 
altars  a  priest  ordained  in  another  Church,  and 
might  insist  on  a  conditional  reordination  before 
admitting  him.1  If  the  Roman  Church  were  to 
consider  our  English  ordinations  doubtful,  and  to 
rule  that  no  English  priest  should  be  admitted  to 
officiate  at  Roman  altars  without  conditional  reordi- 
nation, I  do  not  know  that  we  should  be  at  all 
concerned,  and  I  am  sure  that  no  confusion  would 
be  imported  into  the  science  of  theology. 

The  recent  condemnation  of  English  Orders  does 
impart  confusion  into  the  science  of  theology.  In 
this  respect  it  concerns  us.  Practically  we  may 
ignore  it ;  but  from  the  scientific  point  of  view  we 
are  almost  as  much  interested  as  the  Roman  theo- 
logians themselves.  Theological  science  is  not  the 
property  of  this  or  that  Church ;  it  is  the  property 
of  all  Christians.  Where  we  differ  there  is  con- 
troversial theology  ;  where  we  agree  there  is  the  far 
wider  and  more  important  sphere  of  dogmatic  theo- 

1  I  would  not  say  this  now.  A  bishop  may  certainly,  subject  to 
established  rights  of  appeal,  forbid  a  priest  ordained  elsewhere  to 
exercise  the  sacred  ministry  within  his  diocese  ;  but  to  make  reordina- 
tion one  of  the  terms  of  admission  seems  to  be  an  offence  against  the 
fundamental  unity  of  the  Episcopate  analogous  to  those  of  which  St. 
Cyprian  complained  in  his  controversy  with  Stephen  of  Rome. 


302     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

logy.  Now  for  some  time  past  the  theology  of  Holy 
Orders  has  been  passing  from  the  controversial 
sphere  to  the  dogmatic.  I  do  not  mean  that  all 
open  questions  were  in  the  way  of  being  closed,  but 
that  on  all  sides  there  was  a  growing  agreement  on 
certain  great  principles  ;  and  one  of  these  principles 
was  that  Holy  Orders  were  validly  conferred  by 
imposition  of  hands  with  a  prayer  for  the  ordinand, 
conceived  in  however  wide  and  general  terms.  The 
recent  condemnation  of  English  Orders  cuts  sharply 
across  this  tendency.  Our  belief  will  not  be  affected 
by  it,  but  we  can  hardly  venture  to  say  as  much  of 
Roman  theologians ;  and  whatever  the  effect  on 
individuals  may  be,  you  must  remember  that  the 
only  solid  basis  for  theology,  so  far  as  it  goes  beyond 
the  express  letter  of  Holy  Scripture,  is  the  general 
agreement  of  all  parts  of  the  Church.  There  is 
more  than  one  source  of  such  agreement.  It  may 
be  sustained  by  tradition  ;  it  may  be  arrived  at  by 
patient  study ;  it  is  reached  sometimes  through 
vehement  controversy.  When  it  is  attained,  we  can 
teach  as  from  a  sure  standing  place. 

And  how  is  such  agreement  frustrated  by  the 
recent  Bull  ?  This  pronouncement  cuts  across  the 
current  of  theology ;  it  is  out  of  harmony  with  the 
practice  of  the  Roman  Church  itself.  You  will  say 
that  it  only  confirms  the  practice  of  three  hundred 
years.  Yes,  the  practice  as  regards  England.  But 
the  reasons  alleged  for  the  decision  render  the 
practice  of  the  Roman  Church  as  regards  the 
Oriental  Churches  utterly  irrational.  You  will  know 
to  what  I  refer.  It  has  been  proved  to  demonstra- 
tion that  in  the  English  rite  are  found  all  the  elements 
which  are  common  to  those  Eastern  ordinations 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    303 

which  the  Roman  Church  acknowledges  for  good.1 
They  are  sufficient  there,  but  here  they  are  held 
insufficient.  The  Roman  Church,  departing  from  its 
traditional  caution,  ventures,  at  least  by  implication, 
on  a  definition  of  the  essential  form.  The  English 
form,  says  the  Bull — we  will  not  ask  for  the 
moment  what  constitutes  that  form,  for  I  am  now 
criticizing  the  theology  of  the  Bull  and  not  defend- 
ing our  Ordinal — the  English  form  is  insufficient, 
because  its  words  "minime  sane  significant  definite 
ordinem  sacerdotis  vel  eius  gratiam  et  potes- 
tatem,  quae  praecipue  est  potestas  consecrandi  et 
offerendi  verum  corpus  et  sanguinem  Domini" 
That  is  to  say,  no  form  can  be  valid  which  does 
not  definitely  signify  the  sacerdotal  or  sacrificial 
powers  which  are  attached  to  the  presbyterate. 
Now  it  has  been  abundantly  shown  that  both  the 
ancient  Roman  rite,  and  some  of  the  Eastern  rites 
allowed  by  the  Roman  Church,  have  not  the 
slightest  allusion  to  these  powers.2  What  follows? 
Shall  we  draw  the  absurd  conclusion  that  the  Pope 
condemns  as  null  and  void  the  Orders  of  his  pre- 
decessors during  nine  hundred  years  ;  that  he 
condemns  as  theologically  invalid  the  Orders  of 
Easterns  which  in  practice  he  acknowledges  for 

1  See  the  analyses  in  Gasparri,  De  la  Valeur,  etc.,  and  Boudinhon, 
De  la  Validity  etc. 

2  It  has  often  been  said  that  to  argue  thus  is  to  ignore  the  vel  in 
the  passage  quoted  ;  all  recognized  forms  mention  either  the  presby- 
terate or  the  power  of  sacrificing.     But  the  prayers  of  the  English 
Ordinal  expressly  mention  the  presbyterate,  and  of  these  prayers  it  is 
said  immediately  below  :  "  detractum  esse  quidquid  in  ritu  catholico 
dignitatem  et  officia  sacerdotii  perspicue  designat.     Non  ea  igitur 
forma  esse  apta  et  sufficiens  sacramento  potest  quae  id  nempe  reticet 
quod  deberet  proprium  significare."    That  is  to  say,  mention  of  the 
presbyterate  is  not  sufficient. 


304     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

good  ?  There  is  only  one  possible  evasion  of 
this  conclusion.  We  may  suppose  the  Pope  to 
mean  that  when  once  the  expression  of  these 
powers  has  been  introduced  in  any  part  of  the 
Church,  it  becomes  in  some  way  essential ;  and  so, 
since  the  English  Church  once  employed  it  and  then 
gave  it  up,  something  that  was  become  essential 
was  abandoned.  If  this  be  his  meaning  he  is  still 

o 

hopelessly  at  cross  purposes  with  all  recent  theology, 
and  we  may  leave  him  to  battle  with  Benedict  XIV, 
who  will  ask  him  how,  when,  where,  by  whom,  these 
things  were  made  essential. 

Again,  one  of  the  prayers  which  we  use  in  the 
consecration  of  a  bishop  is  treated  as  an  insufficient 
form,  on  the  ground  that  it  makes  no  mention  of 
the  summum  sacerdotium :  and  of  this  expression 
also  there  is  no  trace  in  other  rites  approved  by 
the  Roman  Church.  Elsewhere  it  is  said  that  in 
the  whole  Ordinal  "  nulla  est  aperta  mentio  sacrificii, 
consecrationis,  sacerdotii,  potestatisque  consecrandi 
et  sacrificii  offerendi."  I  pass  by  the  astounding- 
assertion  that  in  the  English  Ordinal  there  is  no 
mention  of  the  priesthood ;  it  is  more  germane  to 
my  present  purpose  to  note  that  in  other  rites  as 
well  none  of  these  things  are  mentioned.  Nay,  the 
Roman  form  itself,  says  Gasparri — meaning,  of 
course,  the  ancient  prayer  which  he  regards  as 
being  the  essential  form  of  the  existing  Roman 
rite — "the  Roman  form  for  the  presbyterate  says 
nothing  of  the  power  of  consecrating  and  of  sacri- 
ficing."1 Yet  again,  that  prayer  of  the  English 
Ordinal  which,  as  M.  Boudinhon  says,  corresponds 
precisely  to  the  common  form  obtained  by  abstrac- 

1  De  la  valeur,  etc.,  p.  40. 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE    305 

tion  from  a  comparison  of  all  the  forms  in  use — 
the  prayer  beginning  Almighty  God,  the  giver  of 
all  good  things — is  ruled  out  on  the  ground  of  some 
vague  doubts  about  the  supposed  opinions  of  the 
authors  of  the  Ordinal ;  as  if  their  opinions  could 
affect  the  meaning  of  words  contained  in  a  public 
formulary. 

This  treatment  of  the  English  Ordinal  is  in  sharp 
contrast  with  the  teaching  and  practice  of  the 
Roman  Church  in  dealing  with  the  Eastern 

o 

Churches,  orthodox  or  heretical.  Expressions  are 
here  treated  as  essential,  the  absence  of  which  in 
Eastern  rites  is  not  regarded  as  fatal.  The  forms 
of  those  rites  are  accepted  simply  for  what  they 
say ;  here  the  words  are  not  to  be  taken  in  their 
natural  sense,  but  in  a  sense  doubtfully  attributed  to 
their  authors.  Everywhere  else  a  form  sufficient  in 
itself  is  taken  as  sufficiently  claiming  an  orthodox 
meaning ;  here  we  are  told  that  a  certain  form  is  on 
extrinsical  grounds  to  be  rejected  "  etiamsi  forte 
haberi  ea  posset  tanquam  sufficiens  in  ritu  aliquo 
Catholico  quern  Ecclesia  probasset."  The  question 
forces  itself:  If  the  form  were  not  sufficient,  how 
could  the  Church  approve  it ;  if  it  were  sufficient, 
how  could  the  Church  refuse  approbation  ? 

In  this  way  the  Bull  imports  confusion  into  the 
theology  of  Holy  Order.  It  is  not  the  first  time 
that  a  Pope  has  wrought  such  confusion  by  a  rash 
assertion.  The  Roman  Church,  so  staunch  a 
witness  to  certain  truths,  has  a  bad  record  in 
this  matter.  In  the  ninth  century  infinite  trouble 
was  caused  by  Popes  who  declared  the  ordina- 
tions of  their  predecessor,  Formosus,  null  and 
void,  merely  because  he  had  not  been  canonically 


306     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

elected.  Other  Popes,  again,  declared  them  valid. 
Contradiction  followed  contradiction.  Men  were 
reordained,  and  again  excommunicated  because  of 
their  reordination.  It  was  long  before  the  stream 
of  ecclesiastical  tradition  ran  clear. 

Again,  Eugenius  IV  in  the  fifteenth  century  de- 
fined the  porrection  of  the  instruments  as  the  matter 
of  priestly  ordination.  He  did  but  utter  the  con- 
temporary teaching  of  the  schools  ;  but  it  is  one 
thing  for  an  opinion  to  pass  current  in  the  schools, 
it  is  another  for  a  Pope  to  propound  it  in  a  formal 
decree.  The  Decretum  pro  Armenis  seems  to  have 
slept  for  a  time,  but  it  was  revived  in  the  middle  of 
the  sixteenth  century.  Pole  seems  to  have  pub- 
lished it  in  his  Legatine  Council  for  England.  It 
dominated  for  another  century  the  schools  of 
theology.  As  a  consequence  the  ordinations  of  the 
Uniat  Greeks  were  challenged,  and  would  probably 
have  been  condemned,  had  not  the  French  Orator- 
ian  Morinus  come  to  the  rescue  and  by  his  profound 
erudition  shattered  the  authority  of  Eugenius. 

The  stream  of  theology  again  ran  clear ;  prayer 
and  imposition  of  hands  were  all  but  universally 
recognized  as  the  only  essentials  of  ordination,  and 
comparative  study  was  narrowing  down  the  re- 
quisites of  the  prayer.  Now  comes  this  ill-con- 
sidered utterance.  Ill  considered  it  is.  Do  not  be 
misled  by  the  show  of  erudition  and  careful  investi- 
gation which  ushered  it  in.  It  does  not  represent 
the  learning  of  those  who  were  called  in  council — 

o 

of  an  historian  like  Duchesne,  of  a  theologian  like 
De  Augustinis,  of  a  canonist  like  Gasparri.  It 
ignores  their  arguments,  hardly  deigning  to  pay 
them  the  compliment  of  an  answer. 


THEOLOGY  OF  BULL  APOSTOLICAE  CURAE   307 

It  must  do  mischief — mischief  practical  and 
scientific.  It  confuses  the  plain  lines  of  theology. 
It  hinders  the  holy  work  of  the  reunion  of  Chris- 
tians. But  will  the  mischief  abide  ?  History  forbids 
us  to  believe  it.  The  like  mischief  done  in  the  past 
by  the  like  means  had  its  day  and  then  was  healed. 
The  condemnation  of  English  Orders  will  go  the 
way  of  the  condemnation  of  the  ordinations  of 
Formosus ;  the  Bull  Apostolicae  curae  will  go  the 
way  of  the  decree  Exultate}-  Its  arguments  already 
shattered,  its  blunders  exposed,  it  will  one  day  lose 
also  the  extrinsic  authority  which  attaches  to  a 
Papal  utterance. 

1  That  very  eclectic  theologian,  Dr.  C.  A.  Briggs  of  the  Union 
Seminary  at  New  York,  writes  in  his  Church  Unity  (p.  121),  "Pope 
Pius  X  assured  me  in  a  private  interview  that  this  decision  of  his  pre- 
decessor as  to  Anglican  Orders  cannot  be  brought  under  the  category 
of  infallible  decisions."  I  understand,  however,  that  the  accuracy  of 
his  memory  has  been  challenged.  See  also,  below,  the  section  on 
Gregory  IX  and  Greek  Ordinations. 


THE  INTERPRETATION  OF 
THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL 


XI 

THE   INTERPRETATION    OF 
THE   ENGLISH   ORDINAL 

(A  Paper  written  for  the  Church  Historical  Society 
iu  the  year  1898.} 

THERE  is  an  old  debate  as  to  the  meaning  of 
the  English  Ordinal.  It  speaks  of  bishops  and 
priests.  But  in  what  sense  are  these  words  to  be 
accepted  ?  It  is  urged,  on  the  one  hand,  that  they 
are  familiar  words  in  constant  use  for  centuries, 
and  must  bear  in  the  Ordinal  the  sense  which  they 
had  acquired  by  ecclesiastical  usage.  It  is  con- 
tended, on  the  other  hand,  that  a  new  departure 
was  made  by  the  reformers,  who  used  the  old  words 
indeed,  but  in  a  sense  of  their  own,  either  altogether 
novel,  or  at  least  foreign  to  the  sense  of  the  pre- 
ceding age  and  looking  back  to  the  early  days  of 
Apostolic  Christianity  ;  priest  is  only  a  derivative 
by  phonetic  decay  of presbyter,  and  this  word  means 
etymologically  an  elder,  in  which  sense  alone,  and 
not  in  any  sacerdotal  sense,  the  reformers  used  it. 
This  judgment  is  delivered  in  the  most  diverse 
quarters.  Leo  XIII,  in  his  Bull  on  Anglican 
Orders,  declares  that  the  words  bishop  and  priest  in 
the  Ordinal  are  nomina  sine  re ;  ardent  Protestants 
agree  enthusiastically  that  priesthood  in  the  Roman 

3" 


3*2     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

sense  is  unknown  to  the  English  Ordinal  and  to  the 
English  Church. 

In  the  Month  of  March,  1898,  there  is  an  article 
dealing  with  this  question.  The  writer  looks  to  the 
origin  of  the  Ordinal,  and  asks  what  light  is  thrown 
upon  its  meaning  by  the  circumstances  of  its  introduc- 
tion. Father  Sydney  Smith  is  a  courteous  antagonist, 
one  who  always  tries  to  understand  his  adversary, 
and  labours  still  more  to  avoid  misrepresenting  him. 
In  the  article  to  which  I  refer  he  has  missed  in  one 
particular  the  point  of  an  argument  commonly  ad- 
vanced on  our  side  ;  for  the  rest  he  fairly  joins  issue. 

His  contention  is  that  "  Cranmer  and  his  ad- 
herents were  the  true  authors  of  the  Ordinal"  ;  and 
that  "  the  Ordinal  received  its  meaning  from  the 
minds  of  its  compilers.1"  The  conclusion  apparently 
intended,  though  unexpressed,  is  that  the  purpose 
of  the  compilers  was  to  exclude  the  idea  of  the  true 
priesthood  of  the  Church,  and  that  consequently  the 
forms  of  the  Ordinal  do  not  signify  that  priesthood, 
and  cannot  convey  it.2 

There  is  a  twofold  answer  to  this  contention.  In 
the  first  place,  we  do  not  know  with  certainty  who 
were  the  authors  or  compilers  of  the  Ordinal,  and 
therefore  we  cannot  draw  any  conclusions  from  their 
real  or  supposed  opinions.  Secondly,  the  compilers 
were  incapable  of  imposing  any  meaning  of  their  own 
upon  the  Ordinal ;  its  true  sense  was  determined  by 
other  and  less  personal  forces. 

It  is  true  enough  that  in  a  sense  Cranmer  and  his 
adherents  were  the  authors  of  the  Ordinal.  It  was 

1  Month)  pp.  231,  235. 

*  This  argument  is  explicitly  developed  by  Brandi,  Roma  e  Canter- 
bury, p.  36. 


INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL  313 

at  their  instance  that  new  rites  of  Ordination  were 
introduced.  But  this  is  obviously  a  loose  way  of 
talking,  and  from  a  consideration  of  this  kind  we 
cannot  draw  any  conclusion  as  to  the  sense  of  the 
new  rites.  In  a  period  of  reform  or  revolution 
those  who  bring  about  a  change  are  not  unfrequently 
disappointed  with  the  result  of  their  efforts.  The 
promoters  of  the  English  Ordinal  were  possibly  in 
this  case.  They  may  have  had  the  most  mischievous 
purpose  in  agitating  for  a  new  rite,  and  yet  in 
obtaining  it  may  have  missed  their  aim.  There 
is  a  further  looseness  of  thought  in  speaking  of 
"  Cranmer  and  his  adherents."  The  phrase  suggests 
an  organized  party  under  a  recognized  leader,  with 
a  definite  policy  and  avowed  intentions.  In  1550 
there  was  no  such  thing.  But  further,  among  those 
who  moved  for  the  new  Ordinal,  there  were  some 
who  were  in  no  sense  adherents  of  Cranmer.  Father 
Sydney  Smith  enumerates  the  bishops  who  voted  in 
the  House  of  Lords  for  and  against  the  proposal : — 
"  Cranmer,  Goodrich,  Barlow,  Ridley,  Ferrar, 
Wharton,  Sampson,  Skyp,  voted  for  the  Bill ; 
Tunstall,  Heath,  Day,  Thirlby,  Aldrich,  voted 
against  it.  Of  these,  the  first  five  who  voted  for 
the  Bill  were  unmitigated  Calvinists.  Wharton  and 
Sampson  were  Opportunists ;  Skyp  was  the  only 
one  on  that  side  entitled  to  be  called  schismatic 
only,  and  not  heretic  as  well."  * 

Here  is  more  loose  writing.  It  is  an  anachronism 
to  speak  of  "  Calvinists  "  at  all  at  so  early  a  date. 
But  let  us  interpret  the  term  generously,  and  take  it 
to  mean  such  as  sympathized  with  the  Helvetic 
reformers.  Is  the  assertion  then  accurate  ?  Barlow 

1  Month,  p.  232. 


314 

is  a  puzzling-  person.  He  was  Lutheran  in  early 
life.  He  afterwards  wrote  fiercely  against  both 
Lutherans  and  Oecolampadians.  He  then  became 
bishop  and  pursued  a  wavering  course.  Hooper 
claimed  him  as  a  Sacramentarian,  on  the  ground 
of  some  private  conversation.1  He  was  charged 
with  heresy  after  Mary's  accession,  but  he  made  his 
peace,  resigned  his  bishopric,  and  republished  his 
book  against  the  Reformers.  He  afterwards  went 
abroad,  and  was  concerned  in  the  disputes  of  the 
exiles  at  Frankfort ;  but  here  he  seems  to  have 
been  connected  rather  with  Lutherans  than  with 
the  Reformed.2  It  is  rash  to  call  him  an  "unmiti- 
gated Calvinist."  Goodrich  also  was  claimed  by 
Hooper,  but  Mary  left  him  undisturbed,  and  his 
Register  at  Ely  shows  him  vigorous  in  prosecuting 
heretics.  If  he  was  in  any  sense  a  Calvinist,  it  was 
of  a  mitigated  type.  The  title  of  Opportunist,  which 
Father  Sydney  Smith  fixes  on  Wharton  and  Samp- 
son, would  suit  Goodrich  and  Barlow  quite  as  well. 
But  even  Cranmer  and  Ridley,  though  they  event- 
ually wrent  very  far  in  agreement  with  the  Helvetic 
reformers,  were  only  beginning  that  phase  of  their 
development  in  the  early  months  of  1550.  To  call 
them  at  this  period  "unmitigated  Calvinists"  is  to 
fly  in  the  face  of  history.3  Of  Ferrar's  opinions  very 

1  Original  Letters,  I.  p.  76. 

1  See  his  curious  Dialoge^  published  in  1531  and  again  in  1553, 
and  in  particular  the  Preface  of  1553.  It  has  been  reprinted  with  an 
introduction  by  the  Rev.  J.  R.  Lunn,  1897.  In  1559  Melanchthon 
commended  him  to  Elizabeth,  and  the  Markgraf  of  Brandenburg 
described  him  as  "  attached  to  the  Confession  of  Augsburg."  State 
Papers^  For.  Elizabeth,  1558-9,  pp.  109,  154. 

3  Two  years  later,  Martin  Micronius  was  complaining  to  Bullinger 
of  Ridley's  "worldly  policy"  and  opposition  to  reform.  Orig.  Lett.  II, 
p.  580. 


INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL    315 

little  is  known.  Such  were  the  men  whom  Father 
Sydney  Smith  speaks  of  as  "Cranmer's  solid  phalanx 
of  five."  On  the  same  side  were  three  others,  of 
whom  it  is  allowed  that  one  at  least  was  no  heretic. 
But  why  are  Wharton  and  Sampson  suspect? 
Both  retained  their  sees  unchallenged  under  Mary; 
Wharton  was  at  once  promoted  to  Hereford.  Of 
the  eight  bishops  who  voted  for  the  new  Ordinal, 
four  were  orthodox  enough  for  Mary  and  her 
advisers.  If  these  are  rightly  to  be  called  the 
authors  of  the  rite,  what  is  meant  by  attributing 
the  authorship  exclusively  to  Cranmer  and  his 
adherents  ? 

But  Father  Sydney  Smith  slips  from  the  word 
"authors"  to  the  word  "compilers."  The  vote  in 
Parliament  merely  determined  in  general  that  there 
should  be  a  new  Ordinal.  The  drafting  of  the  rite 
was  committed  to  six  prelates  and  six  other  learned 
men.  These  are  the  compilers  from  whose  minds 
the  Ordinal,  he  says,  received  its  meaning.  Who 
then  were  they  ?  We  are  met  with  the  difficulty 
that  little  is  known  about  them.  Internal  evidence, 
as  well  as  the  overwhelming  balance  of  probability, 
makes  it  practically  certain  that  Cranmer  was  one 
of  them.  We  know  that  Heath  was  another.  Who 
the  other  ten  were  is  unknown.  How  then  can  we 
infer  from  their  unknown  minds  the  true  meaning  of 
the  Ordinal?  Conjecture  has  been  busy,  which, 
however,  is  nothing  more  than  conjecture.  It  has 
been  suggested — and  Father  Sydney  Smith  leans  to 
the  suggestion — that  the  same  men  were  appointed 
who  fifteen  months  before  had  deliberated  on  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer.  But  these  were  thirteen 
in  number,  not  twelve,  and  Heath  was  not  among 


316     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

them.  The  conjecture  is,  therefore,  a  doubtful  one.1 
But  if  the  actual  persons  are  unknown,  can  we 
safely  conjecture  anything  as  to  the  composition  of 
the  committee  in  general  ?  A  study  of  the  practice 
of  the  time  leaves  no  room  for  doubt  that  all  parties 
were  represented.  "  But  in  any  case,"  says  Father 
Sydney  Smith,  "as  they  were  appointed  by  the 
Council  in  which  Somerset's  and  Cranmer's  opinions 
ruled,  they  must  have  been  predominantly  Calvinist 
in  their  sentiments." :  Looseness  of  statement  dogs 
him  on  this  occasion,  for  Somerset  had  fallen  from 
power  three  months  previously,  and  certainly  had 
no  voice  in  the  appointment.  That  the  majority  of 
the  committee  belonged  to  the  reforming  party  is 
likely  enough,  but  we  know  that  care  was  taken,  on 
all  such  occasions,  to  include  a  fair  number  of  the 
more  conservative  bishops.3  To  the  twelve  men 
thus  appointed  the  text  of  the  new  Ordinal  was 
submitted,  and  within  a  week  eleven  of  them  sub- 
scribed it  as  approved.  Among  these,  we  have 
reason  to  believe,  were  men  of  unquestioned  ortho- 
doxy. If  then  "the  Ordinal  received  its  meaning 
from  the  minds  of  its  compilers,"  we  have  to  reckon 
with  these  orthodox  members  of  the  committee. 
We  need  not  suppose  that  they  had  their  own  way 

1  It  is  supported  by  Canon  Dixon,  who  supposes  Heath  to  have 
been  substituted  for  Day,  and  Cranmer  to  be  added,  as  president,  to 
the  twelve.     Hist.,  vol.  ii.  p.  493,  and  vol.  iii.  p.  195. 

2  Month,  p.  233. 

3  The  "  Windsor  Commission,"  which  drew  up  the  Order  of  Com- 
munion and  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  included  seven  bishops, 
of  whom  Cranmer,  Ridley  and  Holbeach  were  of  the  reforming  party, 
Thirlby,   Skyp   and   Day  were   conservative,  while   Goodrich   may, 
perhaps,  be  called  indifferent.     In  April,   1549,  a  commission  to  in- 
quire against  heretics  was  appointed  on  exactly  the  same  lines.     The 
bishops  were  Cranmer,  Ridley  and  Holbeach,  Thirlby,  Heath  and 
Day,  with  Goodrich.    Rymer,  xv.  i8r. 


INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL  317 

in  all  things,  but  at  least  the  Ordinal  does  not  stand 
for  anything  to  which  they  could  not  subscribe.1  It 
cannot,  then,  be  taken  as  excluding  the  idea  of  the 
Catholic  priesthood.  Whatever  Cranmer's  own 
proclivities  were,  he  had  his  colleagues  to  consider 
In  this  connexion  Father  Sydney  Smith  makes  a 
bold  assertion.  "  The  text,"  he  says,  "to  which 
they  assented  is  hardly  more  than  an  English  trans- 
lation of  an  ordination  rite  composed  by  Bucer."s 
But  of  what  does  Bucer's  rite  consist?  It  begins 
with  the  hymn  Veni  Sancte  Spiritus.  Then  follow 
three  psalms,  and  two  lessons  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment. The  "principal  Ordainer"  then  reads  an 
exhortation  to  the  ordinands,  and  a  prayer  for  the 
outpouring  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  them,  and 
proceeds  to  the  imposition  of  hands  with  a  benedic- 
tion resembling  nothing  that  was  ever  used  in  the 
Church.  There  is  no  Veni  Creator,  no  Litany ; 
there  is  no  use  of  what  were  then  regarded  as  the 
crucial  words,  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum.  There  is 
only  a  single  rite ;  three  orders  of  ministers  are 
nominally  recognized,  but  all  alike  are  called  presby- 
ters, and  the  form  of  ordination  is  the  same  for  all. 
A  curiously  distorted  imagination  is  needed  to  see 
in  the  English  Ordinal  "hardly  more  than  a  trans- 
lation" of  this.3  It  may  be  that  something  was 

1  On  Heath's  refusal  to  subscribe,  see  below,  p.  324. 

2  Month,  p.  233.    Bucer's  proposed  rite  of  ordination  is  included  in 
his  treatise  De  ordinatione  legitima  ministrorum  revocanda,  which  is 
printed  in  his  Scripta  Anglicana,  pp.  238-259.    Basel,  1577. 

3  The  elements  common  to  Bucer's  rite  and  the  Ordinal  are  as 
follows  :  His  three  Psalms,  40,  132,  135,  are  those  appointed  in  the 
Ordinal  for  the  "  Introit  to  the  Communion."     His  lessons  appear 
among  those  appointed  in  the  Ordinal  for  Epistle  and  Gospel.     His 
exhortation  is  practically  the  same  as  that  in  our  ordination  of  priests. 
His  prayer  before  the  imposition  of  hands  is  a  longer,  and  in  some 


318     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

borrowed  from  Bucer  by  the  compilers  of  the 
Ordinal ;  but  if  so,  their  divergence  from  him 
is  the  more  significant.  Either  Cranmer  himself 
and  his  adherents  did  not  agree  with  him,  or 
else,  agreeing  with  him  in  theory,  they  found  it 
necessary  to  conciliate  their  colleagues  by  differing 
widely  from  him  in  practice.  The  more  we  suppose 
Cranmer  to  have  agreed  with  Bucer,  the  greater 
weight  we  must  assign  to  the  influence  of  his  ortho- 
dox colleagues,  and  the  more  we  must  take  their 
opinions  into  account  as  determining  the  sense  of 
the  Ordinal. 

But  all  this  is  in  the  region  of  pure  conjecture, 
or  of  doubtful  inference.  We  can  find  here  no 
stable  ground  on  which  to  build  an  argument.  I 
think  I  have  proved  my  first  point.  Cranmer  and 
his  adherents  were  in  no  sense  the  sole  authors  of 
the  Ordinal ;  as  for  its  compilers,  since  we  do  not 
know  who  they  were,  we  cannot  infer  its  meaning 
from  their  real  or  supposed  opinions. 

I  contend,  further,  that  the  compilers,  whoever 
they  may  have  been,  were  incapable  of  imposing 
their  own  meaning  upon  the  Ordinal.  They  were 
not,  in  the  strict  sense,  authors.  They  were  not  com- 
posing a  theological  treatise  originating  with  them- 
selves. Their  action  was  purely  ministerial,  and  if  the 
words  which  they  wrote  need  any  external  interpre- 
tation, it  must  be  sought  not  from  them,  but  from 
those  for  whom  they  were  acting.  We  cannot 

respects  a  superior  recension  of  the  prayer  Almighty  God  and 
Heavenly  Father  in  the  same  rite.  On  the  other  hand  his  formula 
for  use  at  the  imposition  of  hands  runs  thus :  "  Manus  Dei  omnipo- 
tentis,  Patris,  et  Filii,  et  Spiritus  Sancti,  sit  super  vos,  protegat  et 
gubernet  vos,  ut  eatis,  et  fructum  vestro  ministerio  quam  plurimum 
afferatis,  isque  maneat  in  vitam  aeternam." 


INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL  319 

determine  the  sense  of  the  Ordinal  by  investigating 
the  opinions  of  its  compilers.  A  judge,  when  called 
upon  to  interpret  an  Act  of  Parliament,  might  as 
well  summon  the  draftsman  and  interrogate  him 
as  to  his  opinions  on  the  subject-matter  of  the  Act. 
We  may  carry  the  analogy  further.  The  private 
opinions  of  the  Members  of  Parliament  who  vote 
for  a  Bill,  or  even  of  the  ministers  in  charge  of 

O 

it,  will  not  affect  the  interpretation  of  the  resulting 
Act.  Mr.  Balfour  is  known  to  be  in  favour  of 
female  suffrage,  but  that  would  not  affect  the  inter- 
pretation of  a  doubtful  passage  in  a  Registration 
Act  carried  through  Parliament  under  his  leader- 
ship. Father  Sydney  Smith  seems  to  rely  on  a 
criterion  of  this  kind.  He  complains  that  we 
wish  the  language  of  the  Ordinal  to  be  inter- 
preted by  the  views  of  those  who  opposed  it  in 
Parliament,  "  rather  than  by  those  of  Cranmer's 
solid  phalanx  of  five  who  were  on  the  victorious 
side."  He  has  an  elaborate  sneer  at  this : — 
"  Some  day,  perhaps,  our  judges  may  rule  that 
Acts  of  Parliament,  though  carried  by  the  votes  of 
the  Government  in  the  teeth  of  fierce  opposition, 
should  be  interpreted  always  in  a  sense  consistent 
with  the  views  of  the  Opposition  ;  but  until  this 
new  ruling  is  made,  it  is  surely  more  according  to 
established  precedents  that  we  should  interpret  the 
Edwardian  Ordinal  by  the  opinions  of  Cranmer 
than  by  those  of  Heath  and  Tunstall."1 

He  could  hardly  have  chosen  a  more  unfortunate 

illustration.  The  sense  of  a  Statute  is  not  determined 

in  this  fashion.    It  may  very  well  happen  that  an  Act, 

when  interpreted  by  the  judges,  will  disappoint  the 

1  Month)  p.  233. 


32o     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

intention  of  its  promoters  and  will  serve  the  ends 
of  those  who  were  in  opposition.  For  an  instance, 
we  have  only  to  look  at  the  Education  Act  of 
1870.  It  was  warmly  supported  by  Churchmen  : 
it  was  fiercely  opposed  by  Dissenters.  According 
to  Father  Sydney  Smith  it  ought  always  to  be 
interpreted  in  a  sense  favourable  to  Churchmen. 
We  may  wish  he  were  right  in  this  instance  ;  but 
the  instance  only  shows  how  egregiously  he  is 
wrong.  It  illustrates  the  hollowness  of  his  conten- 
tion that  we  are  bound  to  interpret  the  Ordinal  by 
the  opinions  or  the  intention  of  Cranmer. 

But  further,  it  is  here  that  Father  Sydney  Smith, 
as  I  have  said,  misses  the  point  of  an  argument 
advanced  on  our  side.  No  one  has  ever  suggested 
anything  so  absurd  as  that  the  Ordinal  should  be 
interpreted  by  the  opinions  of  Heath  and  Tunstall 
or  of  the  rest  who  voted  with  them  in  the  minority. 
The  argument  is  that  account  should  be  taken,  not 
only  of  those  who  voted  for  a  new  rite,  still  less  of 
those  only  who  went  all  lengths  with  Cranmer,  but 
of  the  English  episcopate  as  a  whole.  The  fact 
has  been  continually  pressed  that  although  there 
was  some  opposition  when  the  change  was  first 
mooted,  yet  the  new  Ordinal  was  at  once  adopted 
and  brought  into  use  by  the  English  episcopate.1 
Father  Sydney  Smith  demurs  to  the  use  of  any 
such  phrase.  "It  seems  to  mean,"  he  says,  "that 
Convocation  passed  the  measure ;  and  yet  it  is 
morally  certain  that  Convocation  never  had  any 
say  at  all  in  the  Ordinal  of  I55O."2  But  surely 

1  The  final  adoption  of  the  Ordinal  dates  from  1559,  for  which  see 
above,  p.  124.  But  here  we  are  considering  its  meaning  as  a  ritual 
composition,  and  for  that  we  must  go  back  to  its  origin. 

8  Month,  p.  231. 


INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL   321 

Father  Sydney  Smith  is  aware  that  bishops  can  act 
otherwise  than  synodically.  When,  indeed,  had 
they  ever  acted  synodically  in  dealing  with  such 
matters  ?  In  the  whole  history  of  Ecclesiastical 
Councils  down  to  the  year  1662  there  cannot  be 
found  a  single  synodical  act  regulating  the  rites  and 
ceremonies  of  Ordination.  All  those  employed  in 
various  parts  of  the  Church  were  grounded  on 
usage ;  theoretically  they  were  based  on  the 
authority  of  the  bishops  using  them.  Certain 
English  bishops,  exercising  the  same  authority, 
adopted  the  new  Ordinal.  We  must  not  indeed 
forget  that  it  was  enjoined  by  an  Act  of  Parliament  ; 
we  must  allow  that  in  ^all  probability  most  of  them 
disliked  the  new  rite  exceedingly,  adopting  it  only 
under  pressure  from  without ;  we  know  that  they 
got  rid  of  it  with  alacrity,  as  soon  as  the  external 
pressure  was  withdrawn ;  but  we  are  concerned 
with  their  public  action,  not  with  their  motives,  and 
as  a  matter  of  fact  they  did  adopt  the  Ordinal  and 
bring  it  into  use.  It  was  they  who  gave  to  the 
Ordinal  its  ecclesiastical  sanction. 

Who  were  the  men  who  did  this  ?  We  stand  at 
the  beginning  of  the  year  1550.  There  were  at 
that  time  twenty-four  bishops  in  actual  possession 
of  their  sees  ;  for  Gloucester  and  Norwich  had  just 
become  vacant,  while  Gardiner  of  Winchester  and 
Bonner  of  London  were  in  prison.  Of  these 
twenty-four,  six  have  been  accused,  rightly  or 
wrongly,  of  heresy  about  the  Sacraments.1  Of  the 
remaining  eighteen  it  may  suit  Father  Sydney 

1  Cranmer,    Ridley,   Ferrar,    Barlow,    Holbeach,   and    Goodrich. 
But  of  these  six,  Holbeach  and  Goodrich  were  not  accused  during 
their  lifetime,  and  Barlow,  though  accused,  was  acquitted. 
Y 


322     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Smith  to  call  some  "  Opportunists,"  but  they  were 
never  accused  of  heresy,  and  five  of  them  he  him- 
self describes  as  "notable  for  their  firm  adherence 
to  the  Catholic  doctrine."1  Such  was  the  epis- 
copate which  accepted  the  Ordinal  and  brought 
it  into  use.  It  is  not  known  how  many  of  these 
bishops  actually  used  the  new  rite.  Many  of  the 
records  have  perished,  and  Mr.  Frere  has  shown 
that  ordinations  were  in  a  great  measure  confined 
to  some  few  convenient  centres.2  But  we  know 
that  some  of  them  used  it,  and  among  these 
were  King  of  Oxford,  whose  orthodoxy  has  never 
been  impeached,  and  Thirlby  and  Aldrich,  who  are 
among  those  "  notable  for  their  firm  adherence  to 
the  Catholic  doctrine."3  Of  more  importance  it  is 
to  observe  that  the  Ordinal  was  brought  into 
general  use  without  protest  and  without  question. 
Doubtless  it  was  unwelcome ;  yet  the  opponents  of 
the  reform  could  only  muster  five  bishops  to  vote 
against  it  in  the  House  of  Lords.  Once  it  was 
carried,  all  opposition  ceased.  The  majority  of  the 
bishops  must  have  adopted  the  Ordinal  in  a  Catholic 
sense. 

Did  they  do  this  only  as  individuals  ?  Did  the 
sense  vary  with  the  user  ?  Did  the  Ordinal  bear  an 
orthodox  sense  when  Aldrich  used  it  in  the  diocese 
of  Carlisle,  an  heretical  sense  when  Ridley  ordained 
in  London  ?  The  suggestion  is  not,  perhaps,  entirely 
absurd  :  let  us  consider  it. 

The  Church  of  England  is  not  of  course  a  single 

1  Month,  p.  232. 

2  The  Marian  Reaction,  pp.  101-3. 

3  For  King  and  Thirlby,  see  Frere,  ibid.  pp.  95,  105,  193.     Aldrich 
was  one  of  the  consecrators  of  Harley  in  May,  1553.     Stubbs,  Reg. 
Sacr.  Angl.  p.  81  (first  edition). 


INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL  323 

corporate  body,  but  it  has  a  certain  unity  and 
homogeneity.  To  the  Church  of  England  as  a 
whole  the  Ordinal  was  propounded,  and  by  the 
Church  of  England  as  a  whole  it  was  adopted.  It 
was  a  public  document  of  the  Church  of  England. 
Now  it  is  a  fixed  rule  for  the  interpretation  of 
public  documents  that  they  are  to  be  understood, 
not  in  any  esoteric  sense  which  the  words  may  bear, 
but  in  the  sense  in  which  the  words  are  generally 
used  by  the  community. 

I  have  said  that  the  sense  of  the  Ordinal  must  be 
sought  not  from  the  compilers,  but  from  those  for 
whom  they  acted  ministerially.  For  whom  did 
they  act  ?  They  acted  for  the  Church  of  England 
as  a  whole.  The  sense  of  the  Ordinal,  then,  is  the 
general  sense  of  the  Church  of  England  as  then 
existing.  Those  who  introduced  it  necessarily  put 
upon  it  that  general  sense,  not  any  private  esoteric 
meaning  of  their  own.  The  Ordinal  contained 
familiar  words,  and  they  were  taken  in  the  familiar 
sense.  When  a  bishop  ordained  a  priest  in  the 
autumn  of  1549,  and  again  ordained  a  priest  in  the 
spring  of  1550,  using  on  the  second  occasion  a  new 
rite  introduced  with  the  express  intent  that  the 
order  of  priesthood  "should  be  continued,  and 
reverently  used,  and  esteemed,  in  this  Church  of 
England,"1  we  are  bound  to  suppose  that  these  two 
acts  were  taken  in  the  same  sense  by  the  bishop, 
by  the  subject  of  the  ordination,  and  by  the 
Church  at  large.  We  should  require  overwhelming 
evidence  to  prove  the  contrary,  and  evidence  there 
is  none.  Nay,  there  is  evidence  on  our  side.  The 
Venetian  Daniele  Barbaro,  who  was  in  England  as 

O 

1  Preface  to  the  Ordinal  of  1550. 


324     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Envoy  of  the  Republic,  wrote  of  the  new  rite  for 
conferring  holy  orders,  "  Nor  do  they  differ  from 
those  of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion  save  that  in 
England  they  take  oath  to  renounce  the  doctrine 
and  authority  of  the  Pope."1  It  is  strange  to  ob- 
serve with  what  persistent  silence  those  who  attack 
the  Ordinal  pass  over  this  testimony  of  Barbaro. 

But  we  shall  be  reminded  that  Heath  refused 
to  sign  the  Ordinal.  He  was  one  of  the  twelve 
commissioners  appointed  to  issue  it,  and  he  refused 
to  put  his  name  to  the  book.  Here  then  is  at 
least  one  bishop  who  protested.  Father  Sydney 
Smith  makes  the  most  of  his  witness : — "  He 
absolutely  refused  to  subscribe  it  on  grounds  of 
conscience,  and  preferred  rather  to  be  imprisoned 
and  eventually  deprived  of  his  see.  One  would 
have  thought  that  by  such  action  he  showed 
sufficiently  his  dissent  from  the  doctrine  of  the 
new  rite,  and  yet,  just  because  he  was  weak  enough 
to  promise  his  passive  obedience,  which  as  a  matter 
of  fact  he  was  never  in  a  position  to  render,  he  is 
claimed,  as  we  have  seen,  as  one  of  the  compilers 
whose  opinions,  even  in  preference  to  those  of 
Cranmer,  the  rite  he  refused  to  sign  must  be  held 
to  express."2 

This  is  skilful  advocacy,  which  it  is  not  difficult, 
however,  to  knock  to  pieces.  In  the  first  place, 
there  is  nothing  whatever  in  the  record  about 
"grounds  of  conscience"  for  Heath's  original 

1  Rawdon  Brown,  Venetian  State  Papers,  vol.  v.  p.  349.     Daniele 
Barbaro  became  Patriarch  of  Aquileia  in  1550. 

2  Month,  p.  233.     The  details  of  Heath's  case  will  be  found  in 
Pocock's  Burnet,  vol.  iii.  pp.  339-40,  and  Dasent's  Acts  of  the  Privy 
Council,   vol.   iii.   p.    360.     Also  in  Estcourt,  App.  x.  pp.  xxix-xxxi. 
See  also  Dixon,  vol.  iii.  pp.  196,  322. 


INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL  325 

refusal  to  subscribe,  nor  is  there  any  evidence  of 
"dissent  from  the  doctrine  of  the  new  rite."  On 
the  contrary,  it  is  recorded  in  the  minutes  of  the 
Privy  Council  that  on  February  28  he  was 
ordered  to  sign  the  book,  "specially  for  that 
he  cannot  deny  but  all  that  is  contained  in  the 
book  is  good  and  godly."  That  throws  no  light 
on  his  private  opinion,  but  it  shows  that  he  had 
not  based  his  refusal  on  the  grounds  supposed. 
On  March  4  he  was  committed  to  the  Fleet 
for  refusing  to  subscribe.  Eighteen  months  after- 
wards he  was  brought  again  before  the  Council 
and  ordered  to  sign  the  book  on  pain  of  depriva- 
tion of  his  bishopric ;  and  like  a  man  of  spirit, 
"  hearing  that  commandment,  he  resolutely  answered 
he  could  not  find  in  his  conscience  to  do  it."  In 
the  second  place,  it  was  not  merely  on  this  account 
that  he  faced  his  deprivation.  During  his  eighteen 
months'  imprisonment  events  had  marched  apace, 
and  he  knew  well  that  if  he  yielded  this  point  there 
were  others  that  he  could  not  yield.  "  There  be 
many  other  things,"  he  said,  "  whereunto  he  would 
not  consent,  if  he  were  demanded,  as  to  take  down 
altars  and  set  up  tables."  In  the  third  place,  it  was 
not  only  "passive  obedience "  that  he  promised. 
By  promising  obedience  he  meant  that  he  would 
use  the  book.  "  He  would  obey  it,  but  not  sub- 
scribe it."  Why  should  this  be  put  down  to  weak- 
ness, when  he  was  so  sturdy  on  the  less  important 
point  of  subscribing?  We  cannot  suppose  that 
Heath,  who  was  ready  to  suffer  for  his  principles, 
would  have  consented  to  "  obey  "  the  book,  if  he 
had  dissented  from  its  doctrine.  He  disliked  it, 
perhaps,  intensely,  but  the  evidence  shows  that 


326     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

he  received  it  in  a  Catholic  sense.  We  claim  this 
witness  for  our  side. 

One  other  argument  may  be  glanced  at,  which 
Father  Sydney  Smith  is  too  good  a  theologian 
to  use,  though  others  may.  The  same  bishops  who 
adopted  the  Ordinal  afterwards  rejected  it,  and  in 
some  cases  reordained  the  men  whom  they  had 
themselves  promoted  with  its  rites.1  How  then 
could  they  believe  in  it  ?  The  answer  is  not  far  to 
seek.  There  is  no  evidence  to  show  why  these 
men  were  reordained.  Various  grounds  for  such  a 
course  are  familiar  to  theologians.  One  out  of  many 
is  the  invalidity  of  the  rite  used  in  the  first  ordina- 
tion. The  bishops  who  reordained  men  in  1554 
may  conceivably  have  thought  the  rite  which 
they  had  formerly  used  an  invalid  one  ;  but  there 
is  no  evidence  to  show  that  such  was  their 
opinion.  Nor,  if  there  were  evidence,  would  it 
concern  the  present  issue.  We  are  not  considering 
here  the  validity  of  the  rite  ;  we  are  considering 
the  meaning  of  its  terms.  When  King  of  Oxford 
in  1554  reordained  men  whom  he  had  ordained  by 
the  English  rite  in  1552,  he  may  possibly  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  he  had  been  using  an  invalid 
rite,  but  we  are  perfectly  certain  that  he  meant 
precisely  the  same  thing  on  both  occasions. 

Our  claim,  then,  is  that  in  the  interpretation  of 
the  Ordinal  we  are  bound  to  follow  the  general 
sense  of  the  Church  of  England,  as  it  was  in  1550. 
We  are  not  concerned  with  the  sense  of  the  English 
Church,  or  the  consent  of  English  theologians,  in 
1580  or  in  1850.  We  are  concerned  with  the  year 
of  origin.  It  is  worse  than  useless  to  bring  into 

1  See  Frere,  Tlie  Marian  Reaction,  pp.  118-121. 


INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  ORDINAL  327 

evidence,  either  on  the  one  side  or  on  the  other, 
opinions  that  have  been  current  since  or  are  current 
now.  They  cannot  affect  the  meaning  of  a  document 
which  was  propounded  to  the  Church  and  accepted 
by  the  Church  at  that  specific  time.  The  words 
of  the  Ordinal  mean  what  they  meant  in  1550 ;  and 
in  1550  they  bore  the  meaning  which  was  attached 
to  them  by  the  general  sense  of  the  English  Church. 
What  was  that  meaning  ?  Can  there  be  any  doubt  ? 
The  Church  of  England  was  then  using  a  service 
book  which  spoke  of  "  Mass  "  and  "  Altar."1  Every 
member  of  the  Church  had  been  brought  up 
in  the  old  doctrines  of  the  priesthood  and  the 
sacrifice.  Helvetic  and  Lutheran  opinions  had  been 
within  four  years  ruthlessly  persecuted  by  all  in 
authority.  Persecution  had  ceased,  but  the  old 
doctrinal  standards  were  as  yet  untouched.  Some 
few  men  of  mark  in  the  Church  were  venturing  to 
question  the  received  belief,  but  they  did  so,  in 
public  at  least,  with  caution.2  In  the  Church  at 

1  In  March,  1550,  Hooper  wrote  to  Bullinger  about  the  Prayer- 
book  :  "  I  am  so  much  offended  with  that  book,  and  that  not  without 
abundant  reason,  that  if  it  be  not  corrected,  I  neither  will  nor  can 
communicate  with  the  Church  in  the  administration  of  the  Supper." 
Orig.  Lett.  I,  p.  79.    He  overcame  his  scruples  afterwards,  but  things 
were  then  moving  rapidly  towards  the  correction  that  he  desired. 

2  The  testimony  of  the  witnesses  at  Gardiner's  trial  in  1551,  as  to 
what  was  then  the  authorized  and  current  teaching  of  the  Church  and 
realm  of  England,  is  of  great  interest.     It  may  be  seen  condensed  in 
Dixon,  Hist.,  Vol.  III.  pp.  no,  268.     The  general  effect  is  that  none 
of  the  old  teaching  was  even  impugned  until  Peter  Martyr  began  his 
lectures  at  Oxford  in  the  year  1549.     The  Necessary  Doctrine  or 
"King's   Book"  of  1543  was  still   the  legal  standard  of  teaching. 
Hooper  wrote  in  the  above  quoted  letter  that  he  feared  Ridley's 
promotion  to    London   might  cause   some   change   in   his   conduct. 
"  I  can  scarcely  express  to  you,"  he  says,  "  under  what  difficulties 
and  dangers  we  are  labouring  and  struggling  that  the  idol  of  the 
mass  may  be  thrown  out."      He  had  been  lecturing  on  St.  John's 
Gospel,  and  says,  "  I  incurred  great  odium,  and  not  less  danger,  from 


328     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

large,  among  clergy  and  laity  alike,  innovation 
was  hardly  begun.  To  such  a  public  as  this  was 
propounded  a  rite  for  the  ordination  of  "  Bishops  " 
and  "  Priests."  There  was  only  one  sense  in  which 
it  could  be  received. 

In  Cardinal  Vaughan's  Vindication  of  the  Papal 
Bull  concerning  Anglican  Orders  there  is  an  admir- 
able sentence  which  I  quote  with  great  pleasure  in 
this  connexion.  It  has  often  been  pointed  out  in 
controversy  that  the  older  Roman  rite  of  ordination 
does  not  contain  any  reference  to  the  sacrifice,  nor 
even  the  specific  term  sacerdos.  It  has  only  the 
ambiguous  presbyter.  The  Cardinal  replies  to  this  : 
"  Words  take  their  meaning  from  the  communities 
in  which  they  are  used.  Now  in  the  Catholic 
Church  the  terms  '  priest '  and  '  bishop '  have  al- 
ways had  a  sacrificial  meaning."1  Precisely  so ; 
words  take  their  meaning  from  the  communities 
in  which  they  are  used,  and  at  the  time  when  the 
Ordinal  was  introduced,  whatever  may  have  been 
the  case  at  other  times,  in  this  community  of  the 
Church  of  England  the  words  "  bishop "  and 
"priest"  bore  the  specific  meaning  which  they 
had  borne  for  ages  in  the  Catholic  Church. 

the  sixth  chapter."  Of  the  new  Ordinal  in  particular  he  wrote  :  "  I 
have  sent  it  to  Master  Butler,  that  you  may  know  their  fraud  and 
artifices,  by  which  they  promote  the  kingdom  of  antichrist,  especially 
in  the  form  of  the  oath."  In  the  following  June  he  writes  that  Cran- 
mer  "  is  not  so  decided  as  I  could  wish,  and  dares  not,  I  fear,  assert 
his  opinion  in  all  respects."  Orig.  Lett.  I,  pp.  79,  80,  81,  89. 
1  Vindication,  p.  47. 


GREGORY   IX 
AND   GREEK   ORDINATIONS 


XII 

1 

GREGORY   IX 
AND   GREEK   ORDINATIONS 

(A  Paper  Written  for  the  Church  Historical  Society 
in  the  year  1898.) 

MUCH  has  been  said  about  the  unalterable 
character  of  Papal  decisions  regarding  the 
sacraments.  Some  of  these  have  been  ambigu- 
ously expressed,  and  have  lent  themselves  readily 
to  varied  explanations.  Others  there  are  which 
appear  on  the  surface  clear  and  definite,  but  the 
apparent  force  of  which  has  been  attenuated,  or 
even  reversed,  by  the  advancing  knowledge  of 
theologians.  There  is  one  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury which  has  never,  I  believe,  exercised  the  in- 
genuity of  commentators. 

In  the  year  1231  the  Archbishop  of  Bari  was 
troubled  in  mind  about  the  Greeks,  who  were  prob- 
ably numerous  in  his  Apulian  province.  They  used 
a  form  in  baptism  which  seemed  to  him  of  doubtful 
validity.  He  was  not  sure  about  their  confirmation, 
administered  with  the  holy  chrism  by  simple  priests. 
They  used  a  kind  of  corporal,  blessed  by  a  bishop, 
in  place  of  a  portable  altar-stone,  when  saying 
Mass  in  places  unprovided  with  a  duly  consecrated 
altar.  Worst  of  all,  there  were  some  who,  after  so 
doubtful  a  baptism,  had  procured  for  themselves 

331 


332     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

holy  orders,  and  were  professing  to  exercise  the 
priesthood.  In  his  perplexity  the  Archbishop  ap- 
pealed to  the  reigning  Pontiff,  Gregory  IX.  The 
Pope  replied  to  him,  resolving  his  doubts,  in  a 
letter  which  deserves  to  be  quoted  entire.  I  bor- 
row the  text  from  M.  Auvray's  edition  of  the 
Registers  of  Gregory  IX  : — 

"  Consultationi  tue  breviter  respondemus  quod 
Greci  qui  sub  hac  forma  verborum  :  baptizetur  talis 
in  nomine  Patris,  et  Filii,  et  Spiritus  Sancti,  baptizati 
ab  aliquo  extiterunt,  non  sunt,  cum  non  fuerint 
secundum  formam  evangelicam,  baptizati,  et  ideo 
tarn  illos  quam  de  cetero  baptizandos  sub  hac 
forma  :  ego  te  baptizo  in  nomine  Patris  et  Filii  et 
Spiritus  Sancti,  precipimus  baptizari.  Eos  autem 
qui  extra  tempora  constituta  sacros  ordines  re- 
ceperunt,  caracterem  non  est  dubium  recepisse, 
quos  pro  transgressione  huiusmodi  prius  eis  peni- 
tentia  imposita  competenti,  sustinere  poteris  in  sus- 
ceptis  ordinibus  ministrare,  attentius  provisurus  ut 
id  de  cetero  fieri  in  tua  provincia  non  permittas. 
Crismati  vero,  ut  verbis  tuis  utamur,  a  simplici 
sacerdote  confirmationis  munus  minime  receperunt ; 
quia  de  solis  apostolis  legitur,  quorum  sunt  episcopi 
successores,  quod  per  manus  impositionem  Spiritum 
Sanctum  dabant,  et  ideo  tarn  illi  quam  confirmandi 
de  cetero  a  solis  episcopis  consignentur.  I  His 
quoque  qui  pro  altari  viatico  utuntur  panno  lineo,  a 
Greco  episcopo  benedicto,  studeas  firmiter  inhibere 
ne  in  panno  huiusmodi  celebrare  presumant ;  sed  id 
de  cetero  faciant,  vel  in  altari  itinerario,  vel  in  altari 
maiori,  secundum  ritum  Ecclesiae  consecrato.  Ad 
hec  quia  nonnulli,  ut  asseris,  taliter  baptizati  se 
fecerunt  et  ad  maiores  et  minores  ordines  pro- 


GREGORY   IX   AND   GREEK   ORDINATIONS     333 

moveri,  nos,  quod  tutius  est  sequentes,  eos  primo 
secundum  formam  superius  tibi  traditam  baptizatos 
per  singulos  ordines  precipimus  ordinari. 

"  Dat.  Reate.  II.  idus  novembris,  pontificatus 
nostri  anno  quinto."1 

The  letter  is  very  clear,  though  it  contains  some 
things  not  easily  accounted  for.  In  the  first  place, 
the  Greek  baptisms  are  broadly  declared  invalid. 
T\\Q\r  form  is  defective.  It  is  not,  however,  certain 
that  Gregory  IX  knew  what  he  was  doing  in  this 
matter.  His  words,  carefully  weighed,  suggest  that 
he  was  unaware  that  the  form  which  he  condemns 
was  invariably  used  by  all  the  Greeks.  He  would 
seem  to  have  thought  it  a  mere  occasional  aber- 
ration. But,  wherever  it  was  used,  he  rules  abso- 
lutely that  no  baptism  was  effected.  He  expresses 
no  doubt ;  he  leaves  nothing  vague.  He  does  not 
merely  charge  the  Greeks  generally  with  using  a 
defective  form,  or  merely  assert  that  no  valid  form 
is  contained  in  their  rite.  He  quotes  the  form 
used  ;  he  quotes  it  accurately,  and  he  dogmatically 
declares  it  invalid.  He  lays  it  down  as  a  dogmatic 
fact  that  such  as  are  baptized  in  this  form  are  not 
baptized  at  all. 

1  Les  Registres  de  Grtgoire  IX,  tome  I,  n.  740.  Published  in  the 
Bibliothlque  des  holes  fran$aises  d'Athenes  et  Rome.  An  incomplete 
account  of  this  epistle  is  given  by  Raynaldus  in  his  continuation  of 
Baronius.  Under  the  year  1231  he  records  that  the  Archbishop  of 
Bari  consulted  the  Pope  on  three  questions  :  the  validity  of  holy 
orders  conferred  at  forbidden  times  ;  the  validity  of  confirmation  con- 
ferred by  a  simple  priest  with  the  holy  chrism  ;  and  the  use  of  anti- 
mensia.  He  quotes  at  length  the  parts  of  the  letter  dealing  with 
these  three  questions,  but  passes  over  in  silence  the  first  sentence  and 
the  last,  in  which  the  Greek  baptisms  and  ordinations  are  dealt  with, 
adding  the  date  immediately  after  the  words,  secundum  ritum  Eccle- 
siae  consecrate,  as  if  the  letter  there  ended.  (Raynaldi,  Annales,  anno 
1231,  cap.  30.) 


334     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 
Can  we   determine  the  Ground  on  which  he   so 

<5 

decided  ?  About  forty  years  afterwards  St.  Thomas 
discussed  in  the  Summa  this  same  question.  He 
argues  (P.  iii.  qu.  66,  art.  5)  that  the  minister 
ought  to  be  mentioned  (significari]  in  the  form  of 
baptism.  There  are  two  causes  of  baptism — the 
principal,  which  is  the  Holy  Trinity,  and  the  instru- 
mental, which  is  the  minister — and  both  ought  to 

3  o 

be  mentioned.  The  minister  is  mentioned  in  the 
words  Ego  te  baptizo.  He  allows,  however,  the 
sufficiency  of  the  Greek  form,  on  the  ground  that 
"  quia  exprimitur  actus  exercitus  per  ministrum 
cum  invocatione  Trinitatis,  verum  perficitur  sacra- 
mentum."  This  defence  of  the  Greek  form  was 
adopted  almost  verbally  by  Eugenius  IV  at  Flor- 
ence in  the  Decretum  pro  Armenis  : — "  Quoniam 
cum  principalis  causa  ex  qua  baptismus  virtutem 
habet  sit.Sancta  Trinitas,  instrumentalis  autem  sit 
minister  qui  tradit  exterius  sacramentum,  si  ex- 
primitur actus  qui  per  ipsum  exercetur  ministrum, 
cum  Sanctae  Trinitatis  invocatione,  perficitur  sacra- 
mentum." 

St.  Thomas,  in  requiring  mention  of  the  minister, 
was  following  the  traditional  teaching  of  the 
schools  ;  but  by  his  time,  the  baptism  of  the  Greeks 
being  in  practice  allowed  as  good,  a  certain  modifi- 
cation was  necessarily  imported.  Forty  years  pre- 
viously Gregory  IX,  insisting  perhaps  more  rigidly 
on  this  requirement,  ruled  out  all  Greek  baptisms 
as  invalid.  He  wrote,  indeed,  as  if  he  supposed 
the  form  Ego  te  baptizo  to  be  actually  prescribed  in 
the  Gospel. 

Was  the  Pope  indeed  ignorant  of  the  Greek  use, 
or  did  he  purposely  ignore  it  in  pursuance  of  a 


335 

policy  of  repression  ?  He  goes  on  to  condemn 
the  practice  of  conferring  holy  orders  at  other  than 
the  appointed  times,  without  seeming  to  be  aware 
that  he  is  insisting  on  a  purely  Western  custom. 
In  the  same  way  he  condemns  the  use  of  antimensia, 
the  specially  consecrated  linen  cloths  with  which 
the  Greeks  have  immemorially  supplied  the  lack  of 
a  consecrated  altar.  So,  too,  he  treats  the  Greek 
mode  of  confirmation  as  if  it  were  an  altogether 
unheard-of  novelty.1  Lastly,  he  deals  with  Greek 
ordinations.  Here,  again,  he  assumes  that  what 
we  know  to  have  been  universal  was  only  individual 
and  eccentric.  Some,  he  says,  have  been  advanced 
to  holy  or  lesser  orders  after  a  baptism  of  the  kind 
which  he  has  condemned.  Even  this  statement  is 
founded  on  the  bare  assertion  of  the  Archbishop 
of  Bari.  Such  men,  the  Pope  says,  are  to  be  first 
baptized  properly  and  then  ordained  afresh.  His 
definition  of  dogmatic  fact  invalidates  in  reality  all 
Greek  ordinations  whatever.  He  appears,  indeed, 
to  base  his  decision  on  tutiorist  grounds.  If  we 
could  read  his  words — quod  tutius  est  seqiientes — in 
the  sense  which  they  would  bear  in  a  seventeenth- 
century  document,  it  would  follow  that  he  expressed 
only  a  doubt  as  to  the  validity  of  these  ordinations, 
which  would  involve,  according  to  later  usage,  a 
conditional  reordination.  But  to  read  these  refine- 

1  Here,  again,  it  is  interesting  to  compare  what  is  said  by 
Eugenius  IV.  He  echoes  the  very  words  of  Gregory  IX — "  De 
solis  apostolis  legitur,  quorum  vices  tenent  episcopi,  quod  per  manus 
impositionem  Spiritum  Sanctum  dabant ; "  but  by  an  ingenious  turn 
the  Eastern  custom  is  rendered  tolerable : — "  Legitur  tamen  ali- 
quando  per  apostolicae  sedis  dispensationem  ex  rationabili  et  urgente 
admodum  causa  simplicem  sacerdotem  chrismate  per  episcopum 
confecto  hoc  administrasse  confirmationis  sacramentum."  The  Oriental 
use  depends  upon  a  presumed  Papal  dispensation. 


336     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

ments  into  a  thirteenth-century  document  would  be 
a  gross  anachronism ;  and  further,  it  would  in- 
volve the  intolerable  consequence  that  a  man  who 
was  certainly  unbaptized  might  possibly  be  validly 
ordained.  Gregory  IX,  whether  he  meant  it  or  not, 
whether  he  knew  it  or  not,  laid  down  a  dogmatic 
definition  which  excludes  the  possibility  of  valid 
ordinations  in  the  Greek  Church. 

As  history  shows,  this  position  was  not  sus- 
tained by  the  Popes  who  succeeded  him.  Yet 
Gregory  IX  was  no  ordinary  Pontiff.  He  was  one 
of  the  greatest  in  the  great  constructive  period  of 
the  Papacy.  How  came  he  to  give  such  a  decision  ? 
How  came  it  to  be  so  speedily  ignored  ?  If  we 
had  only  his  prohibition  of  ordinations  apart  from 
the  appointed  seasons  and  of  the  use  of  antimensia, 
we  might  see  in  his  letter  merely  a  determination 
not  to  allow  Greek  customs  to  get  a  foothold  in  the 
West.  He  bids  the  Archbishop  take  care  not  to 
permit  anything  of  the  kind  for  the  future  in  his 
province.  But  the  rest  of  his  decision  touches 
graver  matters.  He  is  dealing  precisely  with  those 
three  sacraments  which  confer  character ;  and  he 
denies  to  the  Greeks  the  real  character  alike  of 
baptism,  of  confirmation,  and  of  holy  orders.  Why 
this?  In  the  year  1231  the  Greek  Church  was 
barely  emerging  from  the  lowest  depth  of  depres- 
sion. A  Latin  emperor  was  still  seated  on  the 
throne  of  Constantinople ;  it  was  still  open  to  a 
Pope  to  dream  of  latinizing  the  Eastern  Church. 
At  the  same  time,  in  Southern  Italy,  Frederick  II 
was  using  Greeks  and  Saracens  alike  in  his  bitter 
contest  with  the  Papacy.  Greeks  were  in  special 
ill  odour  at  Rome,  and  their  ecclesiastical  standing 


GREGORY   IX   AND   GREEK   ORDINATIONS     337 

was  of  the  weakest.  But  it  would  be  unjust  to 
attribute  to  Gregory  IX  a  motive  of  mere  policy. 
We  need  not  suppose  him  free  from  prejudice. 
Prejudice  may  help  to  account  for  the  tone  of  his 
letter ;  but,  as  regards  the  substance,  we  have  no 
reason  to  doubt  that  he  honestly  decided  according 
to  his  knowledge  of  the  truth  that  was  in  him. 
But  in  practice  the  decision  was  speedily  reversed. 
Events  and  opinions  marched  apace.  Within  thirty 
years  the  Latin  dynasty  of  Constantinople  was 
ended.  The  Emperor  Michael  Palaeologus  was 
only  too  ready  to  fortify  his  uncertain  throne  by  the 
friendship  of  the  Pope.  The  Swabian  danger  had 
passed  away,  and  the  Popes  on  their  side  were 
ready  to  listen  to  overtures  from  the  Greeks.  The 
rapid  growth  of  systematic  theology  furnished  ex- 
planations which  tended  to  remove  the  differences 
dividing  Christians,  and  the  first  of  many  abortive 
schemes  of  reunion  was  attempted.  In  1274 
Gregory  X  received  the  Greeks  into  communion. 
From  that  time  forward  it  was  practically  impos- 
sible to  impugn  their  sacraments. 

The  decision  of  Gregory  IX  was  thus  robbed  of  all 
lasting  effect.  It  would  be  interesting  to  speculate 
on  what  would  have  followed  if  this  letter,  instead 
of  slumbering  in  the  Papal  archives,  had  been  pub- 
lished to  the  world,  and  so  had  contributed  to  the 
formation  of  practice  and  opinion.  A  small  part  of 
it — the  part  relating  to  the  time  for  ordination — was 
incorporated  by  Raymond  of  Penaforte  in  the  Decre- 
tals.1 If  the  whole  of  the  letter,  or  the  part  of  it 

1  Lib.  i.  tit.  ii,  de  temp,  ordin.  c.  16.    This  was  quite  regular.     He 
followed  the  ordinary  method  of  the  compilers  of  such  codes,  extract- 
ing from  various  decretal  letters  of  the  Popes  such  sentences  only  as 
bore  upon  the  subjects  to  be  treated.     If  it  be  asked  why  he  did  not 
z 


338     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

relating  to  baptism,  had  in  the  same  way  been 
made  public,  it  would  certainly  have  been  quoted 
by  St.  Thomas  in  his  article  on  the  form  of 
baptism,  where  he  does  actually  quote  a  decretal 
of  Alexander  III  of  similar  tendency.  In  that  case 
he  could  not  have  defended  the  validity  of  Greek 
baptisms.  They  would  have  been  put  aside  as 
unquestionably  invalid.  Where,  then,  would  have 
been  the  Greeks  at  Lyons,  at  Vienne,  at  Florence  ? 
Their  presence  there  may  have  done  little  good, 
but  it  did  at  least  keep  alive  the  idea  of  union,  the 
conception  of  a  Christendom  which  was  not  wholly 
Latin.  If  the  validity  of  Greek  sacraments  had 
been  formally  denied,  the  chasm  between  East  and 
West  would  have  been  made  broader  and  more 
impassable,  the  Western  idea  of  the  Church  would 
have  become  still  narrower  than  it  actually  was. 
Christendom  was  spared  this  further  evil,  because 
a  decretal  epistle  of  Gregory  IX  lay  forgotten  in 
the  registers  of  the  Vatican. 

use,  in  dealing  with  baptism,  the  important  decision  upon  the  form  of 
baptism  given  in  this  letter,  the  answer  is  that  he  had  ready  to  his 
hand  a  decision  given  by  an  earlier  Pope,  the  decretal  of  Alexander 
III  mentioned  in  the  text,  which  seemed  effectually  to  cover  the  same 
ground.  He  cites  this  as  follows  (Lib.  iii.  tit.  42.  de  bapt.  c.  i) :  "Si 
quis  puerum  ter  in  aqua  immerserit  in  nomine  Patris,  et  Filii,  et 
Spiritus  Sancti,  amen,  et  non  dixerit :  ego  te  baptizo  in  nomine  Patris, 
et  Filii,  et  Spiritus  Sancti,  amen,  non  est  puer  baptizatus."  Equally 
with  Gregory  IX,  Alexander  III  regarded  the  words  ego  te  baptizo  as 
essential ;  but,  as  he  did  not  specifically  declare  the  Greek  form 
invalid,  his  decretal  did  not  bar  the  way  to  an  explanation  which 
allowed  the  validity  of  Greek  baptisms.  Yet  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  the  compiler  and  his  contemporaries  would  have  taken  it  in  the 
most  rigorous  sense.  The  only  modification  allowed  by  the  Gloss  of 
Bernard  of  Parma  (died  1263)  is  the  omission  of  the  word  ego,  "quia 
plenum  general  sensum  haec  vox  baptizo,  sine  hoc  pronomine  ego." 
St.  Thomas  (loc.  «'/.),  quoting  the  decretal,  says  that  the  "  actus 
baptism! "  is  expressed  "  vel  per  modum  nostrum  vel  per  modum 
Graecorum." 


APPENDICES 


APPENDIX  I 

SANCTISSIMI  DOMINI  NOSTRI  LEONIS,  DIVINA  PROVI- 
DENTIA  PAPAE  XIII  LITTERAE  APOSTOLICAE  DE 
ORDINATIONIBUS  ANGLICANIS. 

LEO  EPISCOPVS,  SERVUS  SERVORUM  DEI,  AD  PER- 
PETUAM  REI  MEMORIAM. 

APOSTOLICAE  curae  et  caritatis,  qua  pastorem 
±\,  magnum  ovium,  Dominum  nostrum  lesum  Chris- 
tum? referre  pro  munere  et  imitari,  aspirante  eius 
gratia,  studemus,  non  exiguam  partem  pernobili 
Anglorum  nationi  tribuimus.  Voluntatis  in  ipsam  Nos- 
trae  testis  in  primis  est  epistola,  quam  superiore  anno 
propriam  dedimus  ad  Anglos  regnum  Christi  in  fidei 
unitate  quaerentes :  eiusdem  quippe  gentis  et  veterem  cum 
Ecclesia  matre  coniunctionem  commemorando  revoca- 
vimus,  et  felicem  reconciliationem,  excitata  in  animis 
orandi  Dei  sollertia,  contendimus  maturare.  Rursusque 
baud  ita  pridem,  quum  communibus  universe  litteris  de 
unitate  Ecclesiae  fusius  agere  visum  est,  non  ultimo  loco 
respeximus  Angliam  ;  spe  praelucente,  posse  documenta 
Nostra  turn  catholicis  firmitatem  turn  dissidentibus 
salutare  lumen  afferre.  Atque  illud  fateri  libet,  quod 
aeque  gentis  humanitatem  ac  multorum  sollicitudinem 
salutis  aeternae  commendat,  id  est  quam  benevole  Anglis 
probata  sit  instantia  Nostra  et  dicendi  libertas,  nullo 
quidem  acta  humanae  rationis  impulsu.  Nunc  autem 
eadem  Nos  mente  eodemque  animo  deliberatum  habemus 
studia  convertere  ad  quamdam  non  minoris  momenti 
causam,  quae  cum  ea  ipsa  re  votisque  Nostris  cohaeret. 
1  Heb.  xiii.  20. 


342     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Quod  enim  apud  Anglos,  aliquanto  postquam  ab  unitatis 
christianae  centre  abscessum  est,  novus  plane  ritus  ordini- 
bus  sacris  conferendis,  sub  rege  Eduardo  VI,  fuit  publice 
inductus ;  defecisse  idcirco  verum  Ordinis  sacramentum, 
quale  Christus  instituit,  simulque  hierarchicam  succes- 
sionem,  iam  tenuit  communis  sententia,  quam  non  semel 
Ecclesiae  acta  et  constans  disciplina  firmarunt.  Attamen 
recentiore  memoria  hisque  maxime  annis  invaluit  contro- 
versia,  sacraene  Ordinationes  ritu  eduardiano  peractae, 
natura  sacramenti  effectuque  polleant ;  faventibus,  affir- 
mate  vel  dubitanter,  non  modo  scriptoribus  anglicanis 
nonnullis,  sed  paucis  etiam  catholicis  praesertim  non 
anglis.  Alteros  quippe  movebat  praestantia  sacerdotii 
christiani,  exoptantes  ut  duplici  eius  in  corpus  Christ! 
potestate  ne  carerent  sui ;  movebat  alteros  consilium 
expediendi  quodam  modo  illis  reditus  ad  unitatem  : 
utrisque  vero  hoc  persuasum  esse  videbatur,  iam  studiis  in 
eo  genere  cum  aetate  provectis,  novisque  litterarum 
monumentis  ex  oblivione  erutis,  retractari  auctoritate 
Nostra  causam  non  inopportunum  fore.  Nos  autem  ea 
consilia  atque  optata  minime  negligentes,  maximeque 
voci  obsequentes  apostolicae  caritatis,  censuimus  nihil 
non  experiri  quod  videretur  quoquo  modo  conducere  ad 
animarum  vel  avertenda  damna  vel  utilitates  fovendas. 

Placuit  igitur  de  retractanda  causa  benignissime 
indulgere :  ita  sane,  ut  per  summam  novae  disquisitionis 
sollertiam,  omnis  in  posterum  vel  species  quidem  dubitandi 
esset  remota.  Quapropter  certo  numero  viris  doctrina  et 
eruditione  praestantibus,  quorum  compertae  erant  dis- 
similes  in  ipsa  causa  opiniones,  negotium  dedimus  ut 
momenta  sententiae  suae  scriptis  mandarent :  eos  deinde 
ad  Nos  accitos  iussimus  communicare  inter  se  scripta,  et 
quidquid  eo  amplius  ad  rem  cognitu  esset  dignum,  indagare 
atque  expendere.  Consultumque  a  Nobis  est,  ut  ipsi 
diplomata  opportuna  omni  possent  copia  in  tabulariis 
vaticanis  sive  nota  recognoscere  sive  inexplorata  educere ; 
itemque  ut  prompta  haberent  quaecumque  eiusdem  generis 
acta  apud  sacrum  Consilium,  quod  Suprema  vocatur, 
asservarentur,  neque  minus  quaecumque  ad  hoc  tempus 


APPENDIX   I  343 

doctiores  viri  in  utramque  partem  evulgassent  Huius- 
modi  adiumentis  instructos,  voluimus  eos  in  singulares 
congressiones  convenire ;  quae  ad  duodecim  sunt  habitae, 
praeside  uno  ex  S.  R.  E.  Cardinalibus  a  Nobismetipsis 
designate,  data  singulis  facultate  disputandi  libera.  Den- 
ique  earumdem  congressionum  acta,  una  cum  ceteris 
documentis,  Venerabilibus  Fratribus  Nostris  Cardinalibus 
ex  eodem  Consilio  iussimus  exhiberi  omnia  ;  qui  meditata 
causa  eaque  coram  Nobis  deinde  agitata,  suam  quisque 
sententiam  dicerent 

Hoc  ducendae  rei  ordine  praestituto,  ad  intimam  tamen 
aestimationem  causae  aequum  erat  non  ante  aggredi, 
quam  id  perstudiose  quaesitum  apparuisset,  quo  loco  ea 
iam  esset  secundum  Apostolicae  Sedis  praescriptiones 
institutamque  consuetudinem ;  cuius  consuetudinis  et 
initia  et  vim  magni  profecto  intererat  reputare.  Quocirca 
in  primis  perpensa  sunt  documenta  praecipua  quibus  Deces- 
sores  Nostri,  rogatu  reginae  Mariae,  singulares  curas  ad 
reconciliationem  ecclesiae  Anglicae  contulerunt.  Nam 
lulius  III  Cardinalem  Reginaldum  Polum,  natione  Ang- 
lum,  multiplici  laude  eximium,  Legatum  a  latere  ad  id 
opus  destinavit,  tamquam  pacts  et  dilectionis  Angelum 
suum,  eique  mandata  seu  facultates  extra  ordinem 
normasque  agendi  tradidit1;  quas  deinde  Paulus  IV  con- 
firmavit  et  declaravit.  In  quo  ut  recte  colligatur  quidnam 
in  se  commemorata  documenta  habeant  ponderis,  sic 
oportet  fundamenti  instar  statuere,  eorum  propositum 
nequaquam  a  re  abstractum  fuisse,  sed  rei  omnino 
inhaerens  ac  peculiare.  Quum  enim  facultates  Legato 
apostolico  ab  iis  Pontificibus  tributae,  Angliam  dumtaxat 
religionisque  in  ea  statum  respicerent ;  normae  item 
agendi  ab  eisdem  eidem  Legato  quaerenti  impertitae, 
minime  quidem  esse  poterant  ad  ilia  generatim  decernenda 
sine  quibus  sacrae  ordinationes  non  valeant,  sed  debebant 
attinere  proprie  ad  providendum  de  ordinibus  sacris  in  eo 
regno,  prout  temporum  monebant  rerumque  conditiones 
expositae.  Hoc  ipsum,  praeter  quam  quod  ex  natura  et 

1  Id  factum  augusto  mense  MDLIII  per  litteras  sub  plumbo,  Si  ullo 
unquam  tempore  et  Post  nuniium  Nobis,  atque  alias. 


344    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

modo  eorumdem  documentorum  perspicuum  est,  inde 
pariter  liquet,  quod  alienum  prorsus  fuisset,  ita  velle  de  iis 
quae  sacramento  Ordinis  conficiendo  necesse  sunt,  pro- 
pemodum  commonefieri  Legatum,  eumque  virum  cuius 
doctrina  etiam  in  Concilio  Tridentino  eluxerat. 

Ista  probe  tenentibus  non  difficulter  patebit  quare  in 
litteris  lulii  III,  ad  Legatum  apostolicum  perscriptis  die 
VIII  martii  MDLIV,  distincta  sit  mentio,  de  iis  primum  qui 
rite  et  legitime  promoti,  in  suis  ordinibus  essent  retinendi, 
turn  de  iis  qui  non  promoti  ad  sacros  ordines,  possent,  si 
digni  et  idonei  reperti  fuissent,  promoveri.  Nam  certe 
definiteque  notatur,  ut  reapse  erat,  duplex  hominum 
classis  :  hinc  eorum  qui  sacram  ordinationem  vere  susce- 
pissent,  quippe  id  vel  ante  Henrici  secessionem,  vel  si 
post  earn  et  per  ministros  errore  dissidiove  implicitos,  ritu 
tamen  catholico  consueto  ;  inde  aliorum  qui  initiati  essent 
secundum  Ordinale  eduardianum,  qui  propterea  possent 
promoveri,  quia  ordinationem  accepissent  irritam.  Neque 
aliud  sane  Pontificis  consilium  fuisse,  praeclare  confirmat 
epistola  eiusdem  Legati  (die  XXIX  ianuarii  MDLV)  facul- 
tates  suas  episcopo  Norvvicensi  demandantis.  Id  amplius 
est  potissime  considerandum  quod  eae  ipsae  lulii  III 
litterae  afferunt,  de  facultatibus  pontificiis  libere  utendis, 
etiam  in  eorum  bonum  quibus  munus  consecrationis 
minus  rite  et  non  servata  forma  Ecclesiae  consueta  im- 
pensum  fuit :  qua  quidem  locutione  ii  certe  designabantur 
qui  consecrati  eduardiano  ritu ;  praeter  earn  namque  et 
catholicam  formam  alia  nulla  erat  eo  tempore  in  Anglia. 

Haec  autem  apertiora  fient  commemorando  legationem 
quam  Philippus  et  Maria  reges,  suadente  Cardinal!  Polo, 
Romam  ad  Pontificem  februario  mense  MDLV  miserunt. 
Regii  oratores,  viri  tres  admodum  insignes  et  omni  virtute 
praediti,  in  quibus  Thomas  Thirlby,  episcopus  Eliensis,  sic 
habebant  propositum,  Pontificem  de  conditione  rei  re- 
ligiosae  in  eo  regno  notitia  ampliore  edocere,  ab  ipsoque 
in  primis  petere  ut  ea  quae  Legatus  ad  eiusdem  regni 
cum  Ecclesia  reconciliationem  curaverat  atque  effecerat, 
haberet  rata  et  confirmaret :  eius  rei  causa  omnia  ad 
Pontificem  allata  sunt  testimonia  scripta  quae  oportebat, 


APPENDIX   I  345 

partesque  Ordinalis  novi  proxime  ad  rem  facientes.  lam 
vero  Paulus  IV,  legatione  magnifice  admissa,  eisque 
testimoniis  per  certos  aliquot  Cardinales  diligenter  dis- 
cussis,  et  habita  deliberatione  matura,  litteras  Praeclara 
carissimi  sub  plumbo  dedit  die  XX  iunii  eodem  anno.  In 
his  quum  comprobatio  plena  et  robur  additum  sit  rebus  a 
Polo  gestis,  de  ordinationibus  sic  est  praescriptum  •  .  .  . 
qui  ad  ordines  ecclesiasticos  .  .  .  ab  alto  quam  ab  episcopo 
rite  et  recte  ordinato  promoti  fuerunt,  eosdem  ordines  .  .  .  de 
novo  suscipere  teneantur.  Quinam  autem  essent  episcopi 
tales,  non  rite  recteque  ordinati,  satis  iam  indicaverant 
superiora  documenta,  facultatesque  in  earn  rem  a  Legato 
adhibitae :  ii  nimirum  qui  ad  episcopatum,  sicut  alii  ad 
alios  ordines,  promoti  essent,  non  servata  forma  Ecclesiae 
consueta,  vel  non  servata  Ecclesiae  forma  et  intentione, 
prout  Legatus  ipse  ad  episcopum  Norwicensem  scribebat. 
Hi  autem  non  alii  profecto  erant  nisi  qui  promoti  secun- 
dum  novam  ritualem  formam ;  cui  quoque  examinandae 
delecti  Cardinales  attentam  operam  dederant.  Neque 
praetermittendus  est  locus  ex  eisdem  Pontificis  litteris, 
omnino  rei  congruens,  ubi  cum  aliis  beneficio  dispen- 
sationis  egentibus  numerantur  qui  tarn  ordines  quam 
bmeficia  ecclesiastica  nulliter  et  de  facto  obtinuerant.  Nulliter 
enim  obtinuisse  ordines  idem  est  atque  irrito  actu  nullo- 
que  effectu,  videlicet  invalide,  ut  ipsa  monet  eius  vocis 
notatio  et  consuetudo  sermonis  ;  praesertim  quum  idem 
pari  modo  affirmetur  de  ordinibus  quod  de  beneficiis 
ecclesiasticis,  quae  ex  certis  sacrorum  canonum  institutis 
manifesto  erant  nulla,  eo  quia  cum  vitio  infirmante  collata. 
Hue  accedit  quod,  ambigentibus  nonnullis  quinam  revera 
episcopi,  rite  et  recte  ordinati,  dici  et  haberi  possent  ad 
mentem  Pontificis,  hie  non  multo  post,  die  xxx  octobris, 
alias  subiecit  litteras  in  modum  Brevis :  atque,  Nos, 
inquit,  Jiaesitationem  huiusmodi  tollere  et  serenitati  con- 
scientiae  eorum  qui  schismate  durante  ad  ordines  promoti 
fuerant,  mentem  et  intentionem  quam  in  eisdem  litteris 
Nostris  habuimus  clarius  exprimendo,  opportune  consulere 
volentes,  declaramus  eos  tantum  episcopos  et  archiepiscopos 
qui  non  in  forma  Ecclesiae  ordinati  et  consecrati  fuerunt 


346     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

rite  et  recte  ordinatos  diet  non  posse.  Quae  declaratio,  nisi 
apposite  ad  rem  Angliae  praesentem,  id  est  ad  Ordinale 
eduardianum,  spectare  debuisset,  nihil  certe  confecerat 
Pontifex  novis  litteris,  quo  vel  haesitatationem  tolleret  vel 
serenitati  conscientiae  consuleret.  Ceterum  Apostolicae 
Sedis  documenta  et  mandata  non  aliter  Legatus  in- 
tellexit,  atque  ita  eis  rite  religioseque  obtemperavit :  idque 
pariter  factum  a  regina  Maria  et  a  ceteris  qui  cum  ea 
dederunt  operam  ut  religio  et  instituta  catholica  in  pris- 
tinum  statum  restituerentur. 

Auctoritates  quas  excitavimus  lulii  III  et  Pauli  IV 
aperte  ostendunt  initia  eius  disciplinae  quae  tenore  con- 
stanti,  iam  tribus  amplius  saeculis,  custodita  est,  ut 
ordinationes  ritu  eduardiano,  haberentur  infectae  et 
nullae ;  cui  disciplinae  amplissime  suffragantur  testi- 
monia  multa  earumdem  ordinationum  quae,  in  hac  etiam 
Urbe,  saepius  absoluteque  iteratae  sunt  ritu  catholico.  In 
huius  igitur  disciplinae  observantia  vis  inest  opportuna 
proposito.  Nam  si  cui  forte  quidquam  dubitationis 
resideat  in  quamnam  vere  sententiam  ea  Pontificum  dip- 
lomata  sint  accipienda,  recte  illud  valet :  Consuetude 
optima  legum  interpres.  Quoniam  vero  firmum  semper 
ratumque  in  Ecclesia  manserit,  Ordinis  sacramentum  nefas 
esse  iterari,  fieri  nullo  modo  poterat  ut  talem  consue- 
tudinem  Apostolica  Sedes  tacita  pateretur  ac  toleraret. 
Atqui  earn  non  toleravit  solum,  sed  probavit  etiam  et 
sanxit  ipsa,  quotiescumque  in  eadem  re  peculiare  aliquod 
factum  incidit  iudicandum.  Duo  eiusmodi  facta  in 
medium  proferimus,  ex  multis  quae  ad  Supremam  sunt 
subinde  delata :  alterum  (an.  MDCLXXXIV)  cuiusdam 
Calvinistae  Galli,  alterum  (an.  MDCCIV)  loannis  dementis 
Gordon  ;  utriusque  secundum  rituale  eduardianum  suos 
adepti  ordines.  In  primo,  post  exquisitam  rei  investi- 
gationem,  Consultores  non  pauci  responsa  sua,  quae 
appellant  vota,  de  scripto  ediderunt,  ceterique  cum  eis  in 
unarm  conspirarunt  sententiam,  pro  invaliditate  ordina- 
tionis :  tantum  quidem  ratione  habita  opportunitatis, 
placuit  Cardinalibus  respondere,  Dilata.  Eadem  vero 
acta  repetita  et  ponderata  sunt  in  facto  altero :  quaesita 


APPENDIX   I  347 

sunt  praeterea  nova  Consultorum  vota,  rogatique  doctores 
egregii  e  Sorbonicis  ac  Duacenis,  neque  praesidium  ullum 
perspicacioris  prudentiae  praetermissum  est  ad  rem  penitus 
pernoscendam,  Atque  hoc  animadvertisse  oportet  quod, 
tametsi  turn  ipse  Gordon  cuius  negotium  erat,  turn  aliquot 
Consultores  inter  causas  nullitatis  vindicandae,  etiam 
adduxissent  illam  prout  putabatur  ordinationem  Parkerii, 
in  sententia  tamen  ferenda  omnino  seposita  est  ea  causa, 
ut  documenta  produnt  integrae  fidei,  neque  alia  ratio  est 
reputata  nisi  defectus  formae  et  intentionis.  Qua  de  forma 
quo  plenius  esset  certiusque  iudicium,  cautum  fuerat  ut 
exemplar  Ordinalis  anglicani  suppeteret ;  atque  etiam 
cum  eo  singulae  collatae  sunt  formae  ordinandi,  ex  variis 
orientalium  et  occidentalium  ritibus  conquisitae.  Turn 
Clemens  XI,  Cardinalium  ad  quos  pertinebat  consen- 
tientibus  suffragiis,  ipsemet  feria  V,  die  XVII  aprilis 
MDCCIV,  decrevit:  "...  loannes  Clemens  Gordon  ex 
integro  et  absolute  ordinetur  ad  omnes  ordines  etiam 
sacros  et  praecipue  presbyteratus,  et  quatenus  non  fuerit 
confirmatus,  prius  sacramentum  Confirmationis  suscipiat." 
Quae  sententia,  id  sane  considerare  refert,  ne  a  defectu 
quidem  traditionis  instrumentorum  quidquam  momenti 
duxit :  tune  enim  praescriptum  de  more  esset  ut  ordinatio 
sub  conditione  instauraretur.  Eo  autem  pluris  refert  con- 
siderare, eamdem  Pontificis  sententiam  spectare  universe 
ad  omnes  Anglicanorum  ordinationes.  Licet  enim  factum 
attigerit  peculiare,  non  tamen  ex  peculiari  quapiam 
ratione  profecta  est,  verum  ex  vitio  fonnae>  quo  quidem 
vitio  ordinationes  illae  aeque  afficiuntur  omnes :  adeo  ut, 
quoties  deinceps  in  re  simili  decernendum  fuit,  toties  idem 
dementis  XI  communicatum  sit  decretum. 

Quae  quum  ita  sint,  non  videt  nemo  controversiam 
temporibus  nostris  exsuscitatam,  Apostolicae  Sedis  iudicio 
definitam  multo  antea  fuisse  :  documentisque  illis  baud 
satis  quam  oportuerat  cognitis,  fortasse  factum  ut  scriptor 
aliquis  catholicus  disputationem  de  ea  libere  habere  non 
dubitarit.  Quoniam  vero,  ut  principio,  monuimus,  nihil 
Nobis  antiquius  optatiusque  est  quam  ut  hominibus  recte 
animatis  maxima  possimus  indulgentia  et  caritate  pro- 


348 

desse,  ideo  iussimus  in  Ordinale  anglicanum,  quod  caput 
est  totius  causae,  rursus  quam  studiosissime  inquiri. 

In  ritu  cuiuslibet  sacramenti  conficiendi  et  admin istrandi 
iure  discernunt  inter  partem  caeremonialem  et  partem 
essentialem,  quae  materia  et  forma  appellari  consuevit. 
Omnesque  norunt,  sacramenta  novae  legis,  utpote  signa 
sensibilia  atque  gratiae  invisibilis  efficientia,  debere 
gratiam  et  significare  quam  efficiunt  et  efficere  quam 
significant.  Quae  significatio,  etsi  in  toto  ritu  essentiali, 
in  materia  scilicet  et  forma,  haberi  debet,  praecipue  tamen 
ad  formam  pertinet ;  quum  materia  sit  pars  per  se  non 
determinata  et  quae  per  illam  determinetur.  Idque  in 
sacramento  Ordinis  manifestius  apparet,  cuius  conferendi 
materia,  quatenus  hoc  loco  se  dat  considerandam,  est 
manuum  impositio;  quae  quidem  nihil  definitum  per  se 
significat,  et  aeque  ad  quosdam  Ordines,  aeque  ad  Con- 
firmationem  ursurpatur.  lamvero  verba  quae  ad  proxi- 
mam  usque  aetatem  habentur  passim  ab  Anglicanis 
tamquam  forma  propria  ordinationis  presbyteralis,  vide- 
licet, Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,  minime  sane  significant 
definite  ordinem  sacerdotii  vel  eius  gratiam  et  potestatem, 
quae  praecipue  est  potestas  consecrandi  et  offerendi  verum 
corpus  et  sanguinem  Domini}  eo  sacrificio,  quod  non  est 
nuda  commemoratio  sacrificii  in  Cruce  peracti?  Forma 
huiusmodi  aucta  quidem  est  postea  iis  verbis,  ad  officium 
et  opus  presbyteri:  sed  hoc  potius  convincit,  Anglicanos 
vidisse  ipsos  primam  earn  formam  fuisse  mancam  neque 
idoneam  rei.  Eadem  vero  adiectio,  si  forte  quidem  legiti- 
mam  significationem  apponere  formae  posset,  serius  est 
inducta,  elapso  iam  saeculo  post  receptum  Ordinale 
eduardianum  ;  quum  propterea,  Hierarchia  extincta, 
potestas  ordinandi  iam  nulla  esset.  Nequidquam  porro 
auxilium  causae  novissime  arcessitum  est  ab  aliis  eiusdem 
Ordinalis  precibus.  Nam,  ut  cetera  praetereantur  quae 
eas  demonstrent  minus  proposito  sufficientes  in  ritu  angli- 
cano,  unum  hoc  argumentum  sit  instar  omnium,  de  ipsis 
consulto  detractum  esse  quidquid  in  ritu  catholico  digni- 

1  Trid.  Sess.  xxill,  de  sacr.  Ord.  can,  I. 
'J  Ib.  Sesa.  XXII,  de  *acrif.  Missae,  can,  3. 


APPENDIX   I  349 

tatem  et  officia  sacerdotii  perspicue  designat.  Non  ea 
igitur  forma  esse  apta  et  sufficiens  sacramento  potest, 
quae  id  nempe  reticet  quod  deberet  proprium  significare. 

De  consecratione  episcopali  similiter  est.  Nam  formu- 
lae, Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,  non  modo  serius  adnexa 
sunt  verba,  ad  officium  et  opus  episcopi,  sed  etiam  de 
iisdem,  ut  mox  dicemus,  iudicandum  aliter  est  quam  in 
ritu  catholico.  Neque  rei  proficit  quidquam  advocasse 
praefationis  precem,  Omnipotens  Deus ;  quum  ea  pariter 
deminuta  sit  verbis  quae  summum  sacerdotium  declarent. 
Sane  nihil  hue  attinet  explorare,  utrum  episcopatus  com- 
plementum  sit  sacerdotii,  an  ordo  ab  illo  distinctus :  aut 
collatus,  ut  aiunt,/£f  saltum,  scilicet  homini  non  sacerdoti, 
utrum  effectum  habeat  necne.  At  is  procul  dubio,  ex 
institutione  Christi,  ad  sacramentum  Ordinis  verissime 
pertinet,  atque  est  praecellenti  gradu  sacerdotium ;  quod 
nimirum  et  voce  sanctorum  Patrum  et  rituali  nostra 
consuetudine  summum  sacerdotium,  sacri  ministerii  summa 
nuncupatur.  Inde  fit  ut,  quoniam  sacramentum  Ordinis 
verumque  Christi  sacerdotium  a  ritu  anglicano  penitus 
extrusum  est,  atque  adeo  in  consecratione  episcopali 
eiusdem  ritus  nullo  modo  sacerdotium  confertur,  nullo 
item  modo  episcopatus  vere  ac  iure  possit  conferri :  eoque 
id  magis  quia  in  primis  episcopatus  muniis  illud  scilicet 
est,  ministros  ordinandi  in  sanctam  Eucharistiam  et 
sacrificium. 

Ad  rectam  vero  plenamque  Ordinalis  anglicani  aesti- 
mationem,  praeter  ista  per  aliquas  eius  partes  notata, 
nihil  profecto  tarn  valet  quam  si  probe  aestimetur  quibus 
adiunctis  rerum  conditum  sit  et  publice  constitutum. 
Longum  est  singula  persequi,  neque  est  necessarium  :  eius 
namque  aetatis  memoria  satis  diserte  loquitur,  cuius  animi 
essent  in  Ecclesiam  catholicam  auctores  Ordinalis,  quos 
adsciverint  fautores  ab  heterodoxis  sectis,  quo  demum 
consilia  sua  referrent.  Nimis  enimvero  scientes  quae 
necessitudo  inter  fidem  et  cultum,  inter  legem  credendi  et 
legem  supplicandi  intercedat,  liturgiae  ordinem,  specie 
quidem  redintegrandae  eius  formae  primaevae,  ad  errores 
Novatorum  multis  modis  deformarunt.  Quamobrem  toto 


350     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Ordinal!  non  modo  nulla  est  aperta  mentio  sacrificii, 
consecrationis,  sacerdotii,  potestatisque  consecrandi  et 
sacrificii  offerendi ;  sed  immo  omnia  huiusmodi  rerum 
vestigia,  quae  superessent  in  precationibus  ritus  catholici 
non  plane  reiectis,  sublata  et  deleta  sunt  de  industria, 
quod  paulo  supra  attigimus.  Ita  per  se  apparet  nativa 
Ordinalis  indoles  ac  spiritus,  uti  loquuntur.  Hinc  vero 
ab  origine  ducto  vitio,  si  valere  ad  usum  ordinationum 
minime  potuit,  nequaquam  decursu  aetatum,  quum  tale 
ipsum  permanserit,  futurum  fuit  ut  valeret.  Atque  ii 
egerunt  frustra  qui  inde  a  temporibus  Caroli  I  conati 
sunt  admittere  aliquid  sacrificii  et  sacerdotii,  nonnulla 
dein  ad  Ordinale  facta  accessione  :  frustraque  similiter 
contendit  pars  ea  Anglicanorum  non  ita  magna,  recentiore 
tempore  coalita,  quae  arbitratur  posse  idem  Ordinale  ad 
sanam  rectamque  sententiam  intelligi  et  deduci.  Vana, 
inquimus,  fuere  et  sunt  huiusmodi  conata  :  idque  hac 
etiam  de  causa,  quod,  si  qua  quidem  verba,  in  Ordinali 
anglicano  ut  nunc  est,  porrigant  se  in  ambiguum,  ea  tamen 
sumere  sensum  eumdem  nequeunt  quern  habent  in  ritu 
catholico.  Nam  semel  novato  ritu,  ut  vidimus,  quo 
nempe  negetur  vel  adulteretur  sacramentum  Ordinis,  et 
a  quo  quaevis  notio  repudiata  sit  consecrationis  et  sacri- 
ficii ;  iam  minime  constat  formula,  Accipe  Spiritum 
Sanctum,  qui  Spiritus,  cum  gratia  nimirum  sacramenti, 
in  animam  infunditur ;  minimeque  constant  verba  ilia, 
ad  officium  et  opus  presbyteri  vel  episcopi  ac  similia,  quae 
restant  nomina  sine  re  quam  instituit  Christus.  Huius 
vim  argumenti  perspectam  ipsi  habent  plerique  Anglicani, 
observantiores  Ordinalis  interpretes ;  quam  non  dissimu- 
lanter  eis  obiiciunt  qui  nove  ipsum  interpretantes,  Ordi- 
nibus  inde  collatis  pretium  virtutemque  non  suam  spe 
vana  affingunt.  Eodem  porro  argumento  vel  uno  illud 
etiam  corruit,  opinantium  posse  in  legitimam  Ordinis 
formam  sufficere  precationem,  Omnipotent  Deus,  bonorum 
omnium  largitor,  quae  sub  initium  est  ritualis  actionis ; 
etiamsi  forte  haberi  ea  posset  tamquam  sufficiens  in  ritu 
aliquo  catholico  quern  Ecclesia  probasset. 

Cum    hoc   igitur  intimo  formae  defectu  coniunctus  est 


APPENDIX   I  351 

defectus  intentionis,  quam  aeque  necessario  postulat,  ut 
sit,  sacramentum.  De  mente  vel  intentione,  utpote  quae 
per  se  quiddam  est  interius,  Ecclesia  non  iudicat  :  at 
quatenus  extra  proditur,  iudicare  de  ea  debet.  lamvero 
quum  quis  ad  sacramentum  conficiendum  et  conferendum 
materiam  formamque  debitam  serio  ac  rite  adhibuit,  eo 
ipso  censetur  id  nimirum  facere  intendisse  quod  facit 
Ecclesia.  Quo  sane  principio  innititur  doctrina  quae 
tenet  esse  vere  sacramentum  vel  illud,  quod  ministerio 
hominis  haeretici  aut  non  baptizati,  dummodo  ritu  catho- 
lico,  conferatur.  Contra,  si  ritus  immutetur,  eo  manifesto 
consilio  ut  alius  inducatur  ab  Ecclesia  non  receptus,  utque 
id  repellatur  quod  facit  Ecclesia  et  quod  ex  institutione 
Christi  ad  naturam  attinet  sacramenti,  tune  palam  est, 
non  solum  necessarium  sacramento  intentionem  deesse, 
sed  intentionem  immo  haberi  sacramento  adversam  et 
repugnantem. 

Isthaec  omnia  diu  multumque  reputavimus  apud  Nos  et 
cum  Venerabilibus  Fratribus  Nostris  in  Suprema  iudici- 
bus ;  quorum  etiam  Coetum  singulariter  coram  Nobis 
advocare  placuit  feria  v,  die  XVI  iulii  proximi,  in  commem- 
oratione  Mariae  D.  N.  Carmelitidis.  lique  ad  unum  con- 
sensere,  propositam  causam  iam  pridem  ab  Apostolica 
Sede  plene  fuisse  et  cognitam  et  iudicatam  :  eius  autem 
denuo  instituta  actaque  quaestione,  emersisse  illustrius 
quanto  ilia  iustitiae  sapientiaeque  pondere,  totam  rem 
absolvisset.  Verumtamen  optimum  factu  duximus  super- 
sedere  sententiae,  quo  et  melius  perpenderemus  conveniret 
ne  expediretque  eamdem  rem  auctoritate  Nostra  rursus 
declarari,  et  uberiorem  divini  luminis  copiam  supplices 
imploraremus.  Turn  considerantibus  Nobis  ut  idem  caput 
disciplinae,  etsi  iure  iam  definitum,  a  quibusdam  revocatum 
sit  in  controversiam,  quacumque  demum  causa  sit  revoca- 
tum ;  ex  eoque  pronum  fore  ut  perniciosus  error  gignatur 
non  paucis  qui  putent  se  ibi  Ordinis  sacramentum  et 
fructus  reperire  ubi  minime  sunt,  visum  est  in  Domino 
sententiam  Nostram  edicere. 

Itaque  omnibus  Pontificum  Decessorum  in  hac  ipsa 
causa  decretis  usquequaque  assentientes,  eaque  plenissime 


352     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

confirmantes  ac  veluti  renovantes  auctoritate  Nostra,  motu 
proprio  certa  scientia  pronunciamus  et  declaramus,  Ordina- 
tiones  ritu  anglicano  actas,  irritas  prorsus  fuisse  et  esse 
omninoque  nullas. 

Hoc  restat,  ut  quo  ingressi  sumus  Pastoris  magni 
nomine  et  animo  veritatem  tarn  gravis  rei  certissimam 
commonstrare,  eodem  adhortemur  eos  qui  Ordinum  atque 
Hierarchiae  beneficia  sincera  voluntate  optent  et  re- 
quirant.  Usque  adhuc  fortasse,  virtutis  christianae 
intendentes  ardorem,  religiosius  consulentes  divinas  Lit- 
teras,  pias  duplicantes  preces,  incerti  tamen  haeserunt  et 
anxii  ad  vocem  Christi  iamdiu  intime  admonentis.  Probe 
iam  vident  quo  se  bonus  ille  invitet  ac  velit.  Ad  unicum 
eius  ovile  si  redeant,  turn  vero  et  quaesita  beneficia 
assecuturi  sunt  et  consequentia  salutis  praesidia,  quorum 
administram  fecit  ipse  Ecclesiam,  quasi  redemptionis  suae 
custodem  perpetuam  et  procuratricem  in  gentibus.  Turn 
vero  haurient  aquas  in  gaudio  de  fontibus  Salvatoris, 
sacramentis  eius  mirificis :  unde  fideles  animae  in  amicitiam 
Dei,  remissis  vere  peccatis,  restituuntur,  caelesti  pane 
aluntur  et  roborantur,  adiumentisque  maximis  affluunt  ad 
vitae  adeptionem  aeternae.  Quorum  bonorum  revera 
sitientes,  u  tin  am  Deus  pads,  Deus  totius  consolationis  faciat 
compotes  atque  expleat  perbenignus.  Hortationem  vero 
Nostram  et  vota  eos  maiorem  in  modum  spectare  volumus, 
qui  religionis  ministri  in  communitatibus  suis  habentur. 
Homines  ex  ipso  officio  praecedentes  doctrina  et  auctori- 
tate, quibus  profecto  cordi  est  divina  gloria  et  animorum 
salus,  velint  alacres  vocanti  Deo  parere  in  primis  et 
obsequi,  praeclarumque  de  se  edere  exemplum.  Singulari 
certe  laetitia  eos  Ecclesia  mater  excipiet  omnique  com- 
plectetur  bonitate  et  providentia,  quippe  quos  per  arduas 
rerum  difficultates  virtus  animi  generosior  ad  sinum  suum 
reduxerit.  Ex  hac  vero  virtute  dici  vix  potest  quae  ipsos 
laus  maneat  in  coetibus  fratrum  per  catholicum  orbem, 
quae  aliquando  spes  et  fiducia  ante  Christum  iudicem, 
quae  ab  illo  praemia  in  regno  caelesti !  Nos  quidem, 
quantum  omni  ope  licuerit,  eorum  cum  Ecclesia  recon- 
ciliationem  fovere  non  desistemus ;  ex  qua  et  singuli  et 


APPENDIX   I  353 

ordines,  id  quod  vehementer  cupimus,  multum  capere 
possunt  ad  imitandum.  Interea  veritatis  gratiaeque  divi- 
nae  patentem  cursum  ut  secundare  contendant  fideliter, 
per  viscera  misericordiae  Dei  nostri  rogamus  omnes  et 
obsecramus. 

Praesentes  vero  litteras  et  quaecumque  in  ipsis  habentur 
nullo  unquam  tempore  de  subreptionis  aut  obreptionis 
sive  intentionis  Nostrae  vitio  aliove  quovis  defectu  notari 
vel  impugnari  posse  ;  sed  semper  validas  et  in  suo  robore 
fore  et  esse,  atque  ab  omnibus  cuiusvis  gradus  et  praeemi- 
nentiae  inviolabiliter  in  iudicio  et  extra  observari  debere 
decernimus :  irritum  quoque  et  inane  si  secus  super  his 
a  quoquam,  quavis  auctoritate  vel  praetextu,  scienter  vel 
ignoranter  contigerit  attentari  declarantes,  contrariis  non 
obstantibus  quibuscumque. 

Volumus  autem  ut  harum  litterarum  exemplis,  etiam 
impressis,  manu  tamen  notarii  subscriptis  et  per  con- 
stitutum  in  ecclesiastica  dignitate  virum  sigillo  munitis, 
eadem  habeatur  fides  quae  Nostrae  voluntatis  significa- 
tioni  his  praesentibus  ostensis  haberetur. 

Datum  Romae  apud  Sanctum  Petrum  anno  Incarna- 
tionis  Dominicae  millesimo  octingentesimo  non- 
agesimo  sexto,  idibus  Septembribus,  Pontificatus 
Nostri  anno  decimo  nono. 

A.  CARD.  BIANCHI,       C.  CARD.  DE  RVGGIERO. 

Pro-Datarius. 

Visa 

DE  CVRIA.  I.  DE  AQVILA  E  VICECOMITIBVS. 

Loco  Ivl  Plumbi. 

Reg.  in  Secret.  Brevium. 

I.  CVGNONI. 


2   A 


APPENDIX  II 

RESPONSIO  ARCHIEPISCOPORUM  ANGLIAE  AD  LITTERAS 
APOSTOLICAS  LEONIS  PAPAE  XIII  DE  ORDINA- 
TIONIBUS  ANGLICANIS. 

UNIVERSIS  ECCLESIAE  CATHOLICAE  EPISCOPIS  IN- 
SCRIPTA. 

Da  pacem,  Domine,  in  diebus  nostris  ! 

BREVIARIUM   EPISTULAE 

I.  Controversia   haec  quomodo   a   litteris    Papae    Leonis 

(Idibus  Septembribus  anni  1896  datis)  orta  sit. 
II.  Propositum  nostrum  in  hac  responsione  conscribenda. 

III.  Controversiae  de  materia  et  forma  ordinis  et  de  ordina- 

tionibus  nostris  non  novae  sunt.     Sed  mens  Pontificum 
Romanorum  de  his  rebus  semper  incerta  fuit. 

IV.  Leo    Papa    in    hac    controversia  ineunda  multa   bene 

resecuit. 
V.  De   praxi  Curiae  Romanae  solum  et  de  forma   et  in- 

tentione  ecclesiae  nostrae  disputat  Leo. 
VI.  De  praxi,  Reginald©  Polo  legato.  Reconciliatio  ante 
adventum  Poli  paene  absoluta  est,  et  nulli  presbyteri  ob 
defectum  ordinis  destituti.  Unus  forsan  et  alter  sub  eo 
reordinati.  Porro  probatur  Polum  propagasse  principia 
Eugenii  IV  a  Leone  XIII  reiecta.  Sed  praxis  cum 
opinione  vix  consensit. 

VII.  De  praxi  in  causa  lohannis  Gordon,  quae  ex  quatuor 
rationibus  infirmatur.  Documenta  nova  publici  iuris 
fieri  debent. 

VIII.  De  materia,  forma  et  intentione  in  ordinibus  conferendis, 
partim  cum  Papa  consentimus,  sed  de  intentione 
"  quatenus  extra  proditur,"  non  quae  coniecturaco  lli- 
gatur  ex  usu  libertatis  in  Ordinalibus  reformandis  quae 
unicuique  ecclesiae  competit. 
354 


APPENDIX   II  355 

IX.  Doctrinae  scholasticae  de  materia  et  forma  sacra- 
mentorum  non  nimium  insistendum  est :  solum  enim 
Baptisma  omnino  certas  habet. 

X.  Quod  ex  ritu  Confirmationis  plenius  ostenditur. 

XL  Doctrina  Tridentina  de  sacrificio  Eucharistico  et  Canon 
missae  cum  Liturgia  nostra  comparantur. 

XII.  Respondetur  aigumentis  de  formis  necessariis  in  presby- 
teris  et  episcopis  faciendis,  collatione  formarum  quae 
Romae  saeculis  in  et  vi  in  usu  erant. 

XIII.  Episcopos  nihil  refert  "  summos  sacerdotes  "  dici ;  neque 

etiam  "sacerdotes"  in  consecratione  dici  necesse  est, 
cum  ordinatio  episcoporum  per  saltum  tempore  exole- 
verit. 

XIV.  Respondetur   argumentis   duobus   a   Papa   maxime,  ut 

videtur,  approbatis,  quorum  primum  est  de  verbis  in 
forma  A.D.  1662  additis ;  et  priori  loco  de  sufficientia 
formae  anni  1550  in  consecratione  episcopi. 

XV.  Similiter  de  forma  eiusdem  anni  in  ordinatione  presby- 
terorum.  Ostenditur  hanc  solis  sacerdotibus  convenire. 
Addita  fuerunt  alia  verba  ob  Presbyterianorum 
opiniones,  oratione  Omnipotens  Dem  in  alium  locum 
remota.  Haec  mutatio  animadversione  digna  est  cum 
ipse  Papa  de  sufficientia  formae  anni  1662  haesitet,  et 
videatur  agnoscere  ordinationis  partes  moraliter  con- 
iunctas  unam  actionem  efficere. 

XVI.  Secundo  argumento  respondetur  de  cerimoniis  et  oration- 
ibus  a  Patribus  nostris  resectis. 

XVII.  Tertio  argumento  respondetur  de  intentione  Ecclesiae 
nostrae,  quae  constat  praecipue  ex  praefatione  Ordinalis 
et  orationibus  "  Eucharisticis." 

XVIII.  Tota  ratio  mutationum  a  nobis  factarum  explicatur  a 
proposito  Patrum  nostrorum  revertendi  ad  Dominum 
et  ad  Apostolos.  Cerimoniae  et  orationes  resectae 
recentiores  fuerunt  vel  non  necessariae,  vel  Liturgiae, 
lingua  vulgari  recitandae,  non  idoneae. 

XIX.  Dominus  noster  et  Apostoli  in  his  rebus  fidissimi  duces. 
Virtus  formulae  nostrae  in  sacerdotio  conferendo  ex 
collatione  Ordinalis  cum  Pontificali  asseritur. 


356     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

XX.  Decretum  Papae  non  nostros  tantum  ordines  subvertit 
sed  etiam  Orientalium  necnon  suorum.  Nos  aequo 
studio  pacem  et  unitatem  colimus  et  multa  ab  eo  bene 
dicta  agnoscimus.  Rogamus  ut  quid  Christus  voluerit 
in  ministerio  Evangelico  constituendo  patienter  ex- 
pendatur.  Conclusio. 

Appendix.  De  causa  Johannis  Gordon  :  cuius  petitio  mendax 
ordinationis  presbyterorum  formam  tantum  respexit. 
Summarium,  decreto  S.  Officii  praefixum,  collationem 
Ordinalis  nostri  neglegentissime  factam  ostendit  et 
consecrationem  episcopi  solum  tangit  De  consuetudine 
anni  1704  circa  omissionem  traditionis  instrumentorum  : 
et  de  responsione  consultorum  S.  Officii  de  Aethiopum 
ordinationibus. 

UNIVERSIS  ECCLESIAE  CATHOLICAE  EPISCOPIS 
ARCHIEPISCOPI  ANGLIAE  SALUTEM. 

I.  Saepius  officio  nostro  accidit  ut,  cum  de  communi 
salute  velimus  scribere,  oriatur  occasio  de  quaestione  aliqua 
controversa   disserendi,   quae  in  aliud  tempus  abici  non 
possit.     Hoc  certe  recenter  evenit  cum,  mense  Septembri 
proxime  praeterito,  litterae  typis  mandatae  et  publici  iuris 
iam   factae,  subito  ex  Roma  perlatae  essent,  quae  totum 
nostrum  statum  ecclesiasticum  subvertere  conarentur.  His 
quidem    litteris,   ut   par  erat,   animos    nostros   diligenter 
advertebamus   cum    carissimus    frater   noster    Edwardus, 
tune  ArchiepiscopusCantuariensis  et  totius  Angliae  Primas 
et  Metropolitanus,  Deo  ita  volente,  morte  inopina  praerep- 
tus  est     Qui  rem  nobis  tractandam,  quam  ipse  sine  dubio 
summa  cum  doctrina  et  theologica  gratia  tractaturus  erat, 
ultimis   suis  verbis   scriptis   legavit.      Placuit  ergo  nobis 
Archiepiscopis    et    Primatibus    Angliae    hanc   epistulam 
conscribendam   curare,   ut    turn    venerabili    fratri    nostro 
Leoni  Papae  XIII,  cuius  nomine  litterae  istae  proferuntur, 
turn    ceteris   episcopis    Ecclesiae   Christianae   per   totum 
orbem  propagatae,  veritas  rei  innotesceret. 

II.  Grave  quidem  hoc  munus  est  et  quod  non  sine  aliquo 
vehementis  animi  affectu  peragi  possit.     Sed  cum  nos  a 


APPENDIX   II  357 

principe  Pastorum  ad  partem  rauneris  sui  tremendi  in 
Ecclesia  Catholica  sustinendam  vere  ordinatos  esse  firmiter 
credamus,  iudicio  litterarum  istarum  nihil  commovemur. 
Opus  ergo,  quod  nobis  necessario  incumbit,  "in  spiritu 
lenitatis "  adgredimur ;  et  maioris  momenti  ducimus  ut 
doctrina  nostra  de  sacris  ordinibus  et  ceteris  ad  eos 
pertinentibus  ad  futuram  rei  memoriam  palam  fiat,  quam 
ut  victoriam  ex  alia  ecclesia  Christi  in  controversia  re- 
portemus.  Controversiae  tamen  forma  his  litteris  dari 
necesse  est,  ne  quis  dicat  nos  argumentorum  ex  alia  parte 
prolatorum  aciem  evitasse. 

III.  Controversia  vetus  erat,  sed  non  acerba,  de  forma 
et  materia  ordinum  sacrorum,  quae  ex  natura  rei  exorta 
est,  cum  nihil  de  ea  traditum  a  Domino  aut  ab  Apostolis 
Eius  inveniatur,  nisi  exemplum  notissimum  orandi  cum 
manuum  impositione.  De  hac  etiam  re  parum  pronuntia- 
verunt  Concilia  Provincialia,  nihil  certum  et  absolutum 
Oecumenica  et  generalia. 

Neque  etiam  Concilium  Tridentinum,  cui  Patres  nostri 
non  interfuerunt,  rem  directe  tangit.  Quae  obiter  dixit  de 
impositione  manuum  (sess.  XIV  de  extrema  unctione  cap.  Ill) 
et  exactius  de  vi  verborum  "  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum," 
quae  pro  forma  ordinis  accipere  videtur  (sess.  XXIII  desacra- 
mento  ordinis,  canone  iv),  nobis  satis  placent,  et  certe  nulla 
cum  offensione  audiuntur. 

Controversia  recentior  et  acerbior  de  validitate  ordina- 
tionum  Anglicanarum  fuit,  cui  controversiae  theologi 
Romani  cum  ardore  se  immiscuerunt,  et  varia  nobis 
plerumque  crimina  et  defectus  imputaverunt.  Sunt  et  alii 
ex  eis,  neque  ii  minime  prudentes,  qui  defensionem 
nostram  generosius  susceperint.  Pontificum  autem 
Romanorum  sententia  rationibus  plene  instructa  nunquam 
antea  prodiit,  nee,  cum  praxis  reordinandi  sacerdotes 
nostros,  quamvis  non  sine  exceptione,  manifeste  obtineret, 
propter  quos  defectus  reordinarentur  rescire  poteramus. 
Notae  erant  de  Formoso  lites  indignae  et  de  haereticis 
schismaticis  et  simoniacis  ordinationibus  vacillationes 
longae.  Praesto  erant  Innocenti  III  de  unctione  neces- 
sario supplenda  epistula  et  Eugenii  IV  Decretum  ad 


358     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Armenos ;  monumenta  historica  saeculi  XVI,  sed  magna 
ex  parte  usque  hodie  incognita ;  iudicia  varia  Pontificum 
recentiorum  dementis  XI  et  Benedicti  XIV,  sed  dementis 
quidem  verbis  generalibus  concepta  et  ea  ratione  incerta. 
Aderat  etiam  Pontificate  Romanum,  detempore  in  tempus 
reformatum,  sed,  quale  nunc  exstat,  tarn  confuse  composi- 
tum  ut  mentes  inquirentium  magis  turbaret  quam 
adiuvaret.  Si  quis  enim  ritum  de  ordinatione  presbyteri 
spectet,  videt  manus  impositionem  propriam  a  formae 
prolatione  seiungi.  Nescit  etiam  si  ille  qui  in  rubricis 
"  ordinatus  "  dicitur,  revera  iam  ordinatus  sit,  an  potestas 
quae  ad  finem  officii  detur  per  verba  "  Accipe  Spiritum 
sanctum,  quorum  remiseris  peccata  remittuntur  eis,  et 
quorum  retinueris  retenta  sunt  "  cum  impositionemanuum 
Pontificis,  necessaria  sit  pars  sacerdotii  (ut  Concilium 
Tridentinum1  videtur  docere)  an  non  necessaria.  Similiter 
etiam,  si  quis  ritum  de  consecratione  electi  in  episcopnin 
perlegat,  in  orationibus  et  benedictionibus  pro  viro  conse- 
crando  nusquam  eum  "episcopum"  dici  inveniet  nee 
"  episcopatum "  de  eo  praedicari.2  Quod  ad  orationcs 
attinet  occurrit  prima  vice  nomen  episcopatus  in  missa 
"  infra  actionem." 

Ex  his  igitur  documentis  plane  inter  se  variantibus  et 
indefinitis  nemo  vel  prudentissimus  expiscari  poterat  quid 
secundum  Pontifices  Romanes  sacris  ordinibus  revera 
essentiale  et  necessarium  foret. 

IV.  Frater  ergo  ille  noster  venerabilissimus  litteris 
Idibus  Septembribus  datis,  quae  verbis  Apostolicae  curae 
incipiunt,  hanc  quaestionem  modo  adhuc  inusitato  ad- 
gressus  est,  quamquam  argumenta  ab  eo  prolata  satis 
antiqua  sunt.  Neque  negare  volumus  eum  in  hac  contro- 
versia  ineunda  commoditati  Ecclesiae  et  veritati  rerum 
consuluisse  cum  notionem  vanissimam,  sed  theologorum 

III.  J  Sess.  xxiii  de  sacr.  ord.  canone  \  ubi  potestas  aliqua  conse- 
crandi  et  offerendi,  in  sacerdotio  postulatur  una  cum  potestate  peccata 
remittendi  et  retinendi.  Cf.  ib.  cap.  i.  De  his  vide  plura  infra  cap. 
xv  et  xix. 

III.  2  "Cathedra  episcopalis"  post  unctionem  in  benedictione 
memoratur. 


APPENDIX   II  359 

scholae  post  S.  Thomam  Aquinatem  usque  ad  Bene- 
dictum  XIV  et  etiam  usque  hodie  late  acceptam,  de 
traditionis  instrumentorum  necessitate  proiecerit.  Idem 
quoque  alios  errores  et  fallacias  bene  neglexit,  quos  et 
pro  parte  nostra  in  hac  responsione  neglecturi,  sumus,  et 
speramus  theologos  ex  parte  Romana,  exemplo  eius 
adductos,  in  posterum  esse  neglecturos.  „ 

V.  Totius  itaque  iudicii  eius  cardo  in  duobus  punctis 
vertitur,  scilicet  in  praxi   curiae  Romanae  et   in   forma 
ritus  Anglicani,  cui  subiacet  quaestio  tertia,  sed  a  secunda 
non  facile  separanda,  de  intentione  nostrae  ecclesiae.     De 
ilia  statim  respondebimus,  quamvis  nostro  iudicio  minoris 
momenti  sit. 

VI.  De   praxi   curiae   et   legati   Romani   saeculo   XVI, 
quamvis    multa    scripserit,    credimus    Papam    nobiscum 
revera  esse  incertum.     Videmus  enim  nihil  eum  habere 
quod  documentis  hue  usque  bene  cognitis  addi  possit,  et 
ex  exemplari  minus  perfecto  litteras  Pauli  IV  Praeclara 
carissimi  citare  et  ex  eo  disputare.     Ubi  sunt,  exempli 
gratia,  facultates  Polo  post  Augusti  diem  v  1553  et  ante 
Martii  diem  VIII  1554  concessae,  quas  Julius  III,  litteris 
hoc  die  datis,  "  libere  utendas "  circa  ordines  minus  rite 
aut    non    servata    consueta    forma    susceptos    confirmat, 
non    autem    clare   definit?     Nam    sine   illis    facultatibus 
"normae  agendi"  a  Polo  observandae  parum  notae  sunt. 
Distinctio  enim   de   "  promotis "    et    "  non    promotis "    a 
Papa  memorata   (§  3),  quae   in  utrisque  litteris   fit,  non 
statum  cleri  Edwardiani  attinere  videtur,  sed  illorum  qui 
sine  ulla  ordinatione  praetensa  beneficia  tenerent,  ut  saepe 
eo  tempore  fiebat.     Quis  vero  penitus  cognovit  vel  quod 
in  hac  re  factum  sit  vel  quibus  ex  rationibus   factum  ? 
Partem  scimus  :  partem  nescimus.     A  nostra  tamen  parte 
probari  potest  opus  reconciliationis  istius  sub  Maria  regina 
(a    lulii   die   VI    1553    ad    XVII   diem    Novembris    1558) 
auctoritate    regia    et    episcopali,    ante    adventum     Poli, 
maxima  ex  parte  consummatum  fuisse. 

In  quo  conficiendo  multa  inconstantia  et  inaequalitas 
apparet.     Et  cum   multi  sacerdotes  Edwardiani,  propter 


360    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

varias  causas  et  praesertim  ob  coniugium  initum  invenian- 
tur  deprivati,  ob  defectum  ordinis,  quantum  scimus,  nulli- 
Aliqui  propria  voluntate  reordinati  sunt.  Aliqui  unctionem 
susceperunt  in  supplementum  ordinis  iam  collati,  quae 
cerimonia  tune  temporis  magni  momenti  a  quibusdam  ex 
episcopis  nostris  habebatur.1  Aliqui,  et  fortasse  plures 
numero,  in  beneficiis  suis  sine  reordinatione  permanserunt, 
immo  aliquando  ad  nova  promoti  sunt.  Polus  autem 
mense  demum  Novembri  anno  1554  in  Angliam  ex  exilio 
reversus  est,  et  mensibus  sequentibus  quindecim  recon- 
ciliationem  ad  finem  perduxit.  Principium  vero  operis 
eius  videtur  fuisse  ut  statum  rerum  ante  adventum  suum 
existentem  agnosceret,  et  omnes  vires  ad  dominatum 
Papae  restituendum  converteret.  In  quo  unus  et  forsan 
alter  (plures  enim  adhuc  non  inventi  sunt)  sub  Polo  re- 
ordinati sunt,  annis  Sc.  1554  et  1557;  quo  tamen  anno 
hi  duo  cursum  reordinationis  inceperint,  incertum  est. 
Certe,  post  Poli  adventum,  paucissimi  reordinati  sunt. 
Alii  forsan  supplementum  aliquid  ordinis,  qualecunque 
illud  fuerit,  acceperunt,  sed  hoc  in  Registris  nostris  non 
apparet. 

Sed  si  multi  sub  Reginaldo  Polo,  legato  Romano, 
reordinati  essent,  nihil  mirandum  fuisset,  cum  ille  in  con- 
stitutionibus  suis  legatinis  duodecim,  ad  calcem  constitu- 
tionis  secundae,  Eugenii  IV  Decretum  lege  Armenis 
subiunxerit,  "  quia  "  ut  ait  "  in  iis  quae  ad  doctrinam  capitis 
ecclesiae  et  sacramentorum  pertinent  hie  (i.e.,  in  Anglia) 
maxime  erratum  est."2  Et  hoc  non  ut  archiepiscopus 

VI.  l  Vide  Jacobum  Pilkington  Expositionem  super  prophetam 
Aggeum  ii.  10-14,  quae  anno  1560  edita  fuit  {Works  Parker  Society 
p.  163):  "  Proximis  temporibus  papisticis  episcopi  nostri  illi  sancti 
eos  omnes  qui  sine  tali  unctione  ministri  facti  fuissent  ad  se  vocabant 
et  benedictione  papali  benedicebant  et  ungebant,  et  illico  res  absoluta 
est :  pro  vivis  et  defunctis  sacrificare  poterant  :  sed  eis  coniuges 
ducere  nullo  modo  licebat"  etc.  Cf.  Innocentium  III  ep.  vii  3  (1204). 

VI.  2  Vide  Labb.  et  Cossart.  Concilia  torn,  xiv  p.  1740,  Paris.  1672, 
et  torn,  xiii  p.  538  ad  A.D.  1439.  Confer  etiam  Concilia  Mag. 
Britanniae  ed.  Wilkins  torn,  iv  p.  121  col.  2  qui  liber  paulum  differt 
et  verba  Decreti  Eugeniani  omittit.  Constat  Eugenii  verba  ex  Aquin- 
atis  Expositionc  in  articulos  fidei  et  sacramenta  ecclesiae  plerumque 
esse  desumta  (Op.  torn,  viii  pp.  45-9  Venet.  1776). 


APPENDIX   II  361 

noster  sed  ut  legatus  Papae  fecit.  Anno  enim  1556  in- 
eunte  hae  constitutiones  promulgatae  sunt.  Presbyter 
autem  Polus  ordinatus  tandem  fuit  die  XX  mensis  Martii 
eiusdem  anni ;  et  proximo  die,  quo  archiepiscopus  noster 
legitimus  Cranmerus  vivus  combustus  est,  missam  prima 
vice  cantavit ;  die  vero  XXII  archiepiscopus  consecratus  est. 
Decreti  autem  Eugenii  IV,  a  Polo  repetiti,  verba  hie 
citamus,  cum  plane  ostendant  quam  lubricum  et  infirmum 
fuerit  in  hac  re  Romanae  ecclesiae  iudicium.  Porro  cum 
Leo  papa  doctrinam  Poli  in  hac  re  collaudet.  et  scribat 
alienum  prorsus  fuisse  Legatum  a  Papis  commonefieri  "  de 
eis  quae  sacramento  ordinis  conficiendo  necesse  sunt," 
decreti  Eugeniani  penitus  oblivisci  videtur,  quod  in  alia 
parte  litterarum  suarum  tacite  repudiavit.  (Cf.  §  3  et  §  5.) 
"  Sextum  sacramentum  est  ordinis  :  cuius  materia  est  illud, 
per  cuius  traditionem  confertur  ordo  :  sicut  presbyteratus 
traditur  per  calicis  cum  vino,  et  patinae  cum  pane  porrec- 
tionem:  diaconatus  vero  per  libri  evangeliorum  dationem  : 
subdiaconatus  vero  per  calicis  vacui  cum  patina  vacua 
superposita  traditionem:  et  similiter  de  aliis,  per  rerum  ad 
ministeria  sua  pertinentium  assignationem.  Forma  sacer- 
dotii  talis  est :  Accipe  potestatem  offerendi  sacrificium  in 
ecclesia  pro  vivis  et  mortuis.  In  nomine  Patris,  et  Filii>  et 
Spiritus  Sancti.  Et  sic  de  aliorum  ordinum  formis  prout 
in  Pontificali  Romano  late  continetur.  Ordinarius  minister 
huius  Sacramenti  est  episcopus :  effectus,  augmentum 
gratiae,  ut  quis  sit  idoneus  minister."  Hie  ne  verbo  quidem 
attinguntur  impositio  manuum  et  invocatio  Spiritus  Sancti 
in  ordinandos.  Eugenius  tamen,  ut  ex  explicatione  ceter- 
orum  sacramentorum  patet,  non  de  rebus  ab  Armenis 
supplendis,  ut  Romani  interdum  dictitant,  sed  de  rebus 
sacramentorum  administration}  penitus  necessariis,  Aquin- 
atis  vestigia  diligenter  secutus,  Ecclesiam  quasi  magistri 
loco  erudit.  Ita  quoque  in  priori  parte  decreti  eiusdem 
scribit:  "Haec  omnia  sacramenta  tribus  perficiuntur,  vide- 
licet rebus  tamquam  materia,  verbis  tamquam  forma,  et 
persona  ministri  conferentis  sacramentum  cum  intentione 
faciendi  quod  facit  ecclesia :  quorum  si  aliquod  desit,  non 
perfidtur  sacramentum"  (Cone.  XVI  p.  1738) 


362     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

In  ecclesia  autem  nostra  a  mense  Martio  1550,  usque  ad 
diem  i  Novembris  1552,  cum  traditio  instrumentorum 
aliqua  maneret  (sc.  calicis  cum  pane  in  presbyteris,  et 
baculi  pastoralis  in  episcopis,  et  Bibliorum  in  utrisque), 
formae  tamen  eidem  coniunctae,  in  eas  paene  quae  nunc 
in  usu  sunt,  iam  mutatae  erant.  Anno  autem  1552  etiam 
traditio  calicis  et  baculi  omissa  est,  Bibliorum  tantum 
restabat.  Decessit  vero  Edwardus  rex  lulii  die  VI  1553. 

Itaque,  secundum  hoc  decretum,  presbyteri  illi  omnes 
reordinandi  erant.  Sed  opinio  cum  praxi  vix  consensit. 
Neque  ipse  Paulus  IV,  cum  in  brevi  Regimini  universalis 
de  episcopis  "  rite  et  recte  ordinatis  "  caveat,  quidquam  de 
forma  ordinationis  presbyterorum  exigit.  (Vide  infra 
Appendicem  ad  finem.) 

VII.  Fundamentum  secundum,  sed  vix  firmius,  sententiae 
papalis  de  praxi  curiae  apparet  esseiudicium  dementis  XI 
de  causa  Johannis  Gordon,  episcopi  quondam  Gallovidien- 
sis,  latum  feria  quinta  die  XVII  Aprilis  anni  1704  in  Congre- 
gatione  generali  Inquisitionis,  vel,  ut  dici  solet,  S.  Officii. 

De  qua  causa  hie  breviter  respondemus,  cum  propter 
tenebras  S.  Officio  circumfusas,  et  in  litteris  Papae  parum 
dissipatas,  dilucide  tractari  non  possit.  Quod  plenius  dici 
possit  in  Appendicem  reiecimus.  Quatuor  autem  sunt 
praecipue  rationes  propter  quas  haec  causa  infirmo  et 
imbecillo  fundamento  iudicii  eius  videatur.  Imprimis,  cum 
ipse  Gordon  proprio  motu  oraret  ut  ordines  Romano  ritu 
susciperet,  causa  ex  altera  parte  non  audita  est.  Secundo, 
petitio  eius  fabulam  istam  cauponariam  pro  fundamento 
habuit,  et  mendaciis  de  ritu  nostro  vitiata  fuit.  Tertio, 
nova  documenta  "  integrae  fidei "  a  Papa  citata  adhuc 
ambagibus  involuta  sunt,  et  ipse  de  eorum  tenore  et 
sententia,  quasi  incertus,  disputat1  Quarto,  decretum 
S.  O.,  si  illud  cum  iudicio  Papae  concordare  reputemus,  vix 
conciliari  potest  cum  responsione  consultorum  eiusdem 

VII.  T  Confer  Apostolicae  curae  sec.  5  :  "Quae  sententia,  id  sane 
considerate  refert,  ne  a  defectu  quidem  traditionis  instrumentorum 
quidquam  monienti  duxit :  tune  enim  praescriptum  de  more  esset  ut 
ordinatio  sub  conditione  instauraretur"  e.  q.  s.  Quae  argumentandi 
ratio  longe  abest  a  citatione  document!  perspicacis.  Vide  Appendicem. 


APPENDIX   II  363 

S.  O.  de  Aethiopum  ordinationibus,  quae  ante  dies  fere 
octo  dicitur  data,  et  a  theologis  Romanis  usque  ad  annum 
1893  pro  documento  auctoritate  praedito  saepius  edita 
fuit.  Proferenda  sunt  ergo  omnia  ista  documenta  si  res 
ex  aequo  iudicanda  sit. 

In  fine  notandum  est  Gordon  nunquam  ultra  ordines 
minores  in  ecclesia  Romana  processisse.  Satis  enim  fecit 
tantum  ut  pensione  ex  quibusdarn  beneficiis  aleretur.1 

VIII.  Bene  certe  fecit  Papa  qui  in  his  sententiis  tarn 
infirmis  non  adquieverit,  sed  rem  de  novo  retractandam 
censuerit ;  quamvis  hoc  specie  potius  quam  re  factum 
videatur.  Cum  enim  causa  ab  eo  ad  S.  Officium  delata 
fuerit,  constat  illud,  traditionibus  suis  constrictum,  vix 
potuisse  a  iudicio  in  causa  Gordoniana  lato,  quamvis  male 
fundato,  dissentire. 

Porro  cum  rem  ipsam  attingit  et  Concilii  Tridentini 
vestigiis  insistit,  nihil  a  fundamento  iudicii  eius  sententia 
nostra  abhorret.  Materiam  ordinationis  recte  dicit  im- 
positionem  manuum.  De  forma  iudicium  eius  non  tarn 
clare  enuntiatur ;  sed  credimus  eum  velle  dicere  formam 
esse  orationem  vel  benedictionem  ministerio  tradendo 
idoneam,  quae  nostra  etiam  sententia  est.  Neque  Papam 
deserimus  cum  suadet  intentionem  ecclesiae  in  sacris 
ordinibus  conferendis,  "  quatenus  extra  proditur,"  recte 
investigandam  esse.  Cum  enim  mentem  interiorem  sacer- 
dotis  vix  quisquam  adsequi  possit,  ut  ab  ea  validitatem 
sacramenti  pendere  fas  non  sit  dicere,  voluntas  certe 
ecclesiae  et  facilius  exquiri  potest,  et  vera  et  sufficiens  esse 
debet.  Quae  quidem  intentio  ab  ecclesia  nostra  generaliter 
proditur  cum  promissionem  ab  ordinando  exigat,  ut 
doctrinam  sacramenta  et  disciplinam  Christi  recte 
ministrare  velit,  et  eum,  qui  huic  promisso  infidum  se 
monstraverit,  iure  puniendum  doceat.  Et  in  Liturgia 
continue  oramus  pro  Episcopis  et  Parochis  "  ut  tarn  vita 
quam  doctrina  sua  verum  vivumque  (Dei)  verbum  annun- 
tient,  et  sancta  (Eius)  sacramenta  recte  et  rite  ministrent." 

VII.  x  Vide  Le  Quien  Nullite  des  Ord.  Anglicanes,  Paris  1725, 
ii.  pp.  312  et  315. 


364     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Sed  intentio  Ecclesiae  "  quatenus  extra  proditur  " 
exquirenda  est,  ex  formulis  scilicet  publicis  et  sententiis 
definitis  quae  rei  summam  recta  via  tangant;  non  ex 
omissionibus  et  reformationibus  per  occasionem  factis, 
secundum  libertatem  quae  unicuique  Provinciae  et  genti 
competit,  nisi  si  quid  forte  omittatur  quod  in  verbo  Dei 
aut  statutis  universae  Ecclesiae  cognitis  et  certis  ordinatum 
fuerit.  Si  enim  consuetudinem  medii  aevi  et  saeculorum 
recentiorum  pro  norma  quis  adsumat,  videte,  fratres,  quam 
contra  libertatem  Evangelii  agat  et  veram  regni  Christian! 
indolem.  Et,  si  hunc  modum  in  validitate  sacramentorum 
iudicanda  sequimur,  omnia  in  incertum  trahimus,  nisi 
solum  Baptisma,  quod,  secundum  iudicium  universae 
Ecclesiae,  materiam  et  formam  a  Domino  ordinatas  habere 
videatur. 

IX.  Agnoscimus  ergo  cum  Papa  ordinum  sacrorum 
materiam  esse  impositionem  manuum  :  agnoscimus  formam 
esse  orationem  vel  benedictionem  ministerio  tradendo 
idoneam :  agnoscimus  intentionem  ecclesiae,  quatenus  extra 
proditur,  investigandam  esse,  ut  perspiciamus  si  cum  mente 
Domini  et  Apostolorum,  et  Ecclesiae  universae  statutis, 
concordet.  Non  tamen  apud  nos  tantum  valet  doctrina 
ilia,  a  scholasticis  post  tempus  Gulielmi  Autissiodorensis 
(A.D.  1215)  toties  decantata,  quod  unicuique  ex  sacramentis 
Ecclesiae  forma  una  et  materia  omnibus  numeris  definita 
esse  debeat.  Neque  earn  credimus  apud  Romanos  de  fide 
esse.  Periculum  enim  erroris  maximum  inducit  si  quis 
Papa  vel  Doctor,  qui  multum  apud  suos  valeat,  hanc  vel 
illam  formam  aut  materiam,  neque  in  verbo  Dei  neque  a 
Patribus  Catholicis  aut  Conciliis  definitam,  pro  necessaria 
agnoscendam  hominibus  persuadeat. 

Unicum  est  enim,  ut  diximus,  sacramentum  Baptisma, 
quod  et  forma  et  materia  penitus  certum  est.  Et  hoc 
naturam  rei  sequitur.  Cum  enim  Baptisma  Christi  omni- 
bus ostium  Ecclesiae  sit,  et  ab  omnibus  Christianis,  si 
necessitas  urgeat,  ministrari  possit,  condiciones  validi 
Baptismatis  omnibus  notae  esse  debent.  Quod  autem 
ad  Eucharistiam  attinet  (si  quaestiones  de  azymis  et  sale, 


APPENDIX   II  365 

de  aqua,  et  ceteras  huiusmodi  ut  minores  seponas) 
materiam  satis  certam  habet :  de  forma  eius  plena  et 
essentiali  usque  hodie  disceptatur.  Confirmationis  vero 
materia  non  adeo  certa  est ;  et  nos  quidem  Christianos  de 
ea  diverse  sentientes  invicem  damnandos  nullo  modo 
censemus.  Forma  autem  Confirmationis  incerta  est  et 
prorsus  generalis,  oratio  scilicet  vel  benedictio  plus  minus 
congrua,  quae  in  singulis  ecclesiis  fuerit  usitata.  Et  sic 
de  aliis. 

X.  Sed  hie  locus  de  Confirmatione  paulo  latius  tractari 
debet :  multum  enim  lucis  in  quaestionem  a  Papa  pro- 
positam  infert.  Scribit  enim  de  impositione  manuum 
quod  materia  sit  quae  "aeque  ad  Confirmationem  usur- 
patur."  Confirmationis  ergo  materia,  Papa  iudice,  im- 
positio  manuum  videtur  esse,  ut  a  traditione  Apostolica 
nos  etiam  accepimus.  Sed  Romana  ecclesia,  pro  im- 
positione manuum  unicuique  conferenda,  extensionem 
manuum  super  turbam  parvulorum  aut  simpliciter  "  versus 
confirmandos,"  multa  per  saecula,  corrupta  consuetudine 
adhibuit.1  Orientales  (cum  Eugenio  IV)  chrisma  materiam 
esse  decent,  et  impositione  manuum  in  hoc  ritu  nulla 
utuntur.  Si  ergo  doctrina  de  materia  et  forma  sacra- 
mentorum  certa  admittenda  esset,  Roman!  parum  recte 
multis  retro  saeculis  Confirmationem  ministraverunt,  Graeci 
nullam  habent.  Et  plures  quidem  ex  illis  corruptionem  a 
Patribus  illorum  factam  re  confitentur,  impositione  manuum 
cum  chrismatione  iuncta,  ut  rescivimus,  multis  in  locis,  et 
rubrica  in  Pontificalibus  quibusdam  de  hac  re  addita.  Et 
quaerere  licet  an  Orientales,  qui  ad  Romanes  convertantur, 
iterum  Confirmatione  egeant?  an  confitentur  Romani  eos 
aequum  ius  in  materia  immutanda  usurpasse,  sicut  ipsi  in 
corrumpenda  ? 

Quodcumque  respondent  Papa,  satis  clarum  est  illi  doc- 

X.  J  In  Sacramentario  ''  Gelasiano  "  dicto  (saec.  forsan  vii)  adhuc 
legimus  Ad  consignandum  imponit  eis  manum  in  his  verbis :  sequitur 
oratio  de  septiformi  dono  Spiritus.  Et  in  ordinibus  "  Sancti  Amandi " 
dictis,  qui  saeculi  forsan  viii  sunt,  cap.  iv  pontifex  tangit  capita  ip- 
sorum  de  manu.  In  "Gregoriano"  autem  le-vatn  manu  sua  super 
capita  omnium  dicit,  etc.  In  Pontifical!  vero  vulgato  ;  Tune  cxtensis, 
•versus  confirmandos  manibus  dicit,  etc. 


366     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

trinae  de  forma  et  materia  definita  non  ubique  pressius 
insistendum  ;  omnia  enim  sacramenta  Ecclesiae,  excepto 
baptismate,  idcirco  in  dubitationem  trahi  posse. 

XI.  Quaerimus  ergo  qua  ex  auctoritate  formam  definitam 
in  sacris  ordinibus  tradendis  Papa  invenerit  ?  Testimonium 
nullum  ab  eo  adlatum  vidimus  nisi  locos  duo  e  Concilii 
Tridentini  placitis  (sess.  XXIII  de  Sacramento  ordinis, 
canone  I,  et  sess.  XXII  de  sacrificio  missae,  canone  III),  quae 
post  Ordinale  nostrum  compositum  promulgata  sunt,  ex 
quibus  colligit  praecipuam  sacerdotii  Christian!  gratiam  et 
potestatem  esse  consecrationem  et  oblationem  corporis  et 
sanguinis  Domini.  Auctoritas  plane  eius  Concilii  apud 
gentem  nostram  nunquam  accepta  est,  et  ab  eo  multa  vera 
cum  falsis,  multa  incerta  cum  certis,  commixta  invenimus. 
Quoad  locos  autem  a  Papa  citatos  respondemus,  nos  de 
S.  Eucharistiae  consecratione  maxima  cum  reverentia 
curare,  et  solis  sacerdotibus  rite  ordinatis  et  nullis  aliis 
Ecclesiae  ministris  permittere.  Eucharistiae  etiam  sacri- 
ficium  vere  docemus,  nee  sacrificii  crucis  "nudam  esse 
commemorationem"  credimus,  ut  Concilio  illo  citato  nobis 
videtur  imputari.  Satis  tamen  credimus  in  liturgia  nostra 
qua  in  S.  Eucharistia  celebranda  utimur, — corda  habentes 
ad  Dominum,  et  munera,  quae  antea  oblata  sunt,  iam  con- 
secrantes  ut  nobis  corpus  et  sanguis  fiant  Domini  nostri 
Jesu  Christi, — sacrificium  quod  ibidem  fit  ita  significare. 
Memoriam  scilicet  perpetuam  pretiosae  mortis  Christi  qui 
ipse  est  Advocatus  noster  apud  Patrem  et  propitiatio  pro 
peccatis  nostris,  usque  ad  Adventum  Eius  secundum 
praeceptum  Eius  observamus.  Primo  enim  sacrificium 
laudis  et  gratiarum  offerimus ;  turn  vero  sacrificium  Crucis 
Patri  proponimus  et  repraesentamus,  et  per  illud  remis- 
sionem  peccatorum  et  omnia  alia  Dominicae  passionis 
beneficia  pro  tota  et  universa  Ecclesia  impetramus  ;  sacri- 
ficium denique  nostrum  ipsorum  Creatori  omnium  offeri- 
mus, quod  per  oblationes  creaturarum  Ipsius  iam  signifi- 
cavimus.  Quam  actionem  totam,  in  qua  plebs  cum 
sacerdote  partem  suam  necessario  sumit,  sacrificium 
Eucharisticum  solemus  nominare. 


APPENDIX   II  367 

Porro  cum  nos  satis  stricte  admoneat  Papa  de  necessitu- 
dine  quae  "  inter  fidem  et  cultum,  inter  legem  credendi  et 
legem  supplicandi  intercedat,"  aequum  videtur  ut  animum 
et  vestrum  et  nostrum  ad  liturgiam  Romanam  propius 
vertamus.  Et  cum  ipsum  "  Canonem  Missae  "  diligenter 
inspiciamus,  quid  de  notione  sacrificii  ibidem  prodita 
luculenter  apparet?  Cum  formulis  nostris  Eucharisticis 
satis  consentit,  vix  aut  ne  vix  quidem  cum  Concilii 
Tridentini  placitis.  Vel  potius  dici  debet  a  Concilio  illo 
duos  sacrificii  explicandi  modos  simul  proferri,  unum  qui 
cum  scientia  liturgica  et  prudentia  Christiana  concinat, 
alterum  qui  theologiae  populari  et  periculosae  de  propitia- 
tione  Eucharistica  addictus  sit.  In  Canone  autem  Missae 
sacrificium,  quod  offertur,  quatuor  modis  describitur. 
Primo  loco  est  "sacrificium  laudis,"1  quae  notio  totam 
actionem  permeat,  et  quodammodo  sustinet,  et  in  unum 
quasi  corpus  coniungit  Secundo  est  oblatio  facta  a  servis 
Dei  et  cuncta  familia  Eius,  de  qua  oblatione  petitur  "  ut 
nobis  corpus  et  sanguis  fiat"  Filii  sui  Domini  nostri. 
Tertio  est  oblatio  Maiestati  Eius  de  suis  "  donis  ac  datis  " 
(id  est  de  frugibus  segetum  et  arborum,  ut  recte  explicat 
Innocentius  III2,  quamvis  verba  Domini  de  eis  iam  dicta 
sint  a  sacerdote),  qui  Panis  sanctus  vitae  aeternae  et  Calix 
salutis  perpetuae  nominantur.  Quarto  loco  et  ultimo 
(Supra  quae  propitid}  sacrificium,  tribus  modis  oblatum, 
et,  secundum  sententiam  Romanam,  iam  plene  consecra- 
tum,  cum  sacrificiis  patriarcharum  Abel  et  Abrahae,  et 
cum  eo  quod  obtulit  Melchisedech,  comparatur.  Quod 
cum  "sanctum  sacrificium,  immaculata  hostia"  dicatur, 
non  solum  ratione  offerentis  sed  etiam  oblatorum  com- 

XI.  1  "Sacrificium  laudis"  id  est  Eucharisticum  vel  pacificum 
(A nglice  "thank-offering"  vel  "peace-offering")  quod  in  hac  re  ab 
aliis  sacrificiis  differt,  cum  in  illo,  homo,  qui  offert,  cum  Deo  partem 
oblationis  ex  ritu  sumat.  Nomen  ex  veteri  versione  Latina  est  (vide 
Pentateuchum  Lugdunensem),  quod  ab  Hieronymo  "  pro  gratiarum 
actione  oblatio"  vel  "hostia  gratiarum"  redditur,  Levit.  vii.  12,  13. 
Unde  in  liturgia  nostra  ambo  coniunguntur  :  "this  our  sacrifice  of 
praise  and  thanksgiving." 

XI.  2  De  sacro  altaris  mysterio  v  cap.  2. 


368     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

parari  videtur.1  Deinde  rogat  ecclesia  ut  haec  perferantur 
per  manus  sancti  Angeli  ad  sublime  altare  Dei.  Denique 
occurrit,  post  secundam  seriem  nominum  sanctorum, 
orationis  particula  {Per  quern  haec  omnid)  quae  ad  bene- 
dicendas  fruges  aptior  videtur,  quam  sacrificio  eucharistico 
idonea. 

Ex  praecedentibus  ergo  plane  constat  legem  credendi  a 
Concilio  Tridentino  propositam  aliquantum  ultra  limites 
legis  supplicandi  progressam  esse.  Res  certe  mysterii 
plena  est  et  quae  mentes  hominum  facile  ad  cogitationes 
altas  et  profundas,  valido  amoris  et  pietatis  affectu, 
adtrahat.  Sed,  cum  summa  reverentia  tractari  debeat,  et 
caritatis  Christianae  vinculum  non  disputationum  subtilium 
occasio  habenda  sit,  definitiones  curiosae  de  modo  sacrificii 
et  de  ratione  qua  coniunguntur  sacrificium  aeterni  sacer- 
dotis  et  sacrificium  Ecclesiae,  quae  aliquo  certe  modo 
unum  sunt,  nostro  iudicio,  vitandae  sunt  potius  quam 
promovendae. 

XII.  Quare  ergo  forma  et  intentio  nostra  in  presbyteris 
et  episcopis  faciendis  impugnatur? 

Scribit  quidem  Papa,  si  ea  quae  minoris  momenti  sunt 
negligamus,  "  ordinem  sacerdotii  vel  eius  gratiam  et 
potestatem,  quae  praecipue  est  potestas  consecrandi  et 
offerendi  verum  Corpus  et  Sanguinem  Domini,  eo  sacrificio 
quod  non  est  nuda  commemoratio  sacrificii  in  cruce  peracti " 
in  presbytero  ordinando  debere  significari.  De  episcopi 
consecrandi  forma  quid  voluerit  non  adeo  clarum  est,  sed 
videtur,  secundum  setentiam  illius,  quovis  modo  "  summum 
sacerdotium  "  oportere  de  eo  praedicari. 

XI.  *  Haec  oratio  interpretes  satis  torsit.  Conferendi  sunt  e.g. 
Innocentius  III  de  sacro  altaris  myst.  v  3,  Bellarminus  de  sacr.  Euch. 
(de  mtssa)  lib.  vi  24,  Romsee  Sensus  literalis  rituum  missae  art.  xxx. 
Vetustior  eius  forma  apparet  in  [Pseudo-Ambrosii]  libro  de  Sacra- 
mentis  iv  6  §  27  ubi  partes  eius  inverse  ordine  leguntur.  Scribitur 
etiam  "per  manus  Angelorum  tuorum."  Tempore  Leonis  I  Canoni 
Romano  iam  addita  videtur,  si  vera  sint  quae  in  Vita  eius  referuntur, 
de  verbis  "sanctum  sacrificium,  immaculatam  hostiam,"  ab  illo 
subiunctis.  Cf.  serm.  iv  3,  ubi  de  Melchisedech  dicitur  "  illius  sacra- 
menti  immolans  sacrificium,  quod  Redemtor  noster  in  suo  corpore  et 
sanguine  consecravit." 


APPENDIX   II  369 

Utrumque  tamen  mirum  est,  cum  in  antiquissima  for- 
mula Romae  saeculo  tertio  post  Christum  ineunte,  ut 
videtur,  usitata,  (cum  eadem  plane  forma  et  pro  episcopo 
et  pro  presbytero,  excepto  nomine,  adhibeatur)  nihil 
omnino  dictum  sit  de  "summo  sacerdotio  "  aut  de"sa- 
cerdotio,"  neque  de  sacrificio  corporis  et  sanguinis  Christi. 
"  Orationes  et  oblationes  quas  (Deo)  offeret  die  noctuque  " 
solum  commemorantur,  et  potestas  ad  remittenda  peccata 
tangitur.1 

In  Sacramentario  autem  veteri  Romano,  quod  saeculo 
VI  forsan  tribui  potest,  pro  presbyteris  solum  orationes 
tres  adhibentur.  Duae  sunt  breviores  sc.  Oremus, 
dilectissimi  et  Exaudi  nos,  et  tertia  longior,  praefationi 
Eucharisticae  similis,  quae  vera  Benedictio  est,  et  cum 
impositione  manuum  olim  coniuncta,  quae  incipit  Domine 
sancte  pater  omnipotens,  aeterne  Deus,  honorum  omnium,  etc. 
Quae  orationes  a  saeculo  sexto  ad  nonum,  et  forsan  ultra, 
sine  ullis  aliis  cerimoniis,  totum  ritum  presbyteri  ordinandi 
in  ecclesia  Romana  continebant.  Hae  orationes,  parum 
immutatae,  in  Pontificali  Ramano  retinentur,  et  quasi 
nucleum  formulae  de  ordinatione  Presbyteri  efficiunt, 
quamvis  impositio  manuum,  longiori  formae  olim  coniuncta, 
in  principium  actionis  transient,  et  ad  finem  missae  rursus 
data  sit.  In  Benedictione  autem  "  sacerdotium "  de 
presbyteris  non  praedicatur,  nee  quidquam  in  orationum 
serie  ilia  de  sacrificandi  potestate  aut  de  peccatis  remit- 
tendis  dicitur.  "Gratia"  etiam  "  sacerdotalis,"  quae  in 
Pontificalibus  plurimis  in  oratione  secunda  invocatur,  in 
quibusdam  et  nostris  et  extraneis2  simpliciter  "  gratia 
spiritualis  "  est.  Sed  haec  forma  sine  dubio  valida  est. 

Similia  dici  possunt  de  forma  episcopi  consecrandi. 
Orationes  et  Benedictio  in  Pontificali  hodierno  restant, 
parum  mutatae.  Incipiunt  vero  Exaudi  Domine  supplicum 
preces  (nunc  Adcsto\  Propitiare  Domine  et  Deus  honorum 

XII.  1  Vide  Canones  Hippolyti  ab  Hans  Achelis  editos  t.  vi  vol- 
uminum  dictorum  Texte  und  Untersuchungen  Gebhardti  et  Harnack 
Lips.  1891,  pp.  39-62. 

XII.  2  Vide  e.g.  E.  Martene  de  ant  ecc.  rit.  t.  ii.  p.  429,  493, 
Rotom.  1700. 

2   R 


370    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

omnium.  Secunda  "  cornu  gratiae  sacerdotalis,"  tertia 
"  summum  sacerdotium  "  memorat,  sed  nihil  aliud  quod  ad 
propositum  Papae  confirmandum  proferri  potest.  Cetera 
omnia  quae  in  Pontifical!  habentur,  ex  usu  temporum 
recentiorum,et  praesertim  ex  ritibus  Gallicanis,  derivantur1 

Et  hoc  etiam  dicendum  est  de  potestate  peccata  re- 
mittendi,  quae  a  Concilio  Tridentino  una  cum  "  potestate 
aliqua  consecrandi  et  offerendi "  (not.  Ill1)  et  aequa  cum 
significantia,  memoratur.  Nusquam  apparet  usque  ad 
saec.  XI  in  ordinatione  presbyteri :  nusquam  in  forma 
antiqua  Romana  de  consecratione  episcopi.  Apparet 
tantum  in  longa  interpolatione  Gallicana  ad  benedictionem 
episcopi  Sint  speciosi  munere  tuo  pedes  eius  usque  ad  ut 
fructum  deprofectu  omnuin  consequatur. 

Sed  Papa  qui  ad  Concilium  Tridentinum  provocat  ab 
eodem  iudicari  debet.  Aut  ergo  hae  formulae  Romanae 
nullae  erant  propter  defectus  de  sacrificio  et  de  peccatis 
remittendis,  aut  auctoritas  Concilii  illius  nulla  est  ad  hanc 
quaestionem  de  necessaria  forma  ordinis  decidendam. 

Alia  etiam  forma  antiqua2  consecrandi  episcopi,  apud 

XII.  J  Sacramentarium  vetus  Romanum  ex  tribus  potissimum 
libris  colligi  potest,  quod  ad  orationes  attinet,  "  Leoniano "  sc., 
"  Gelasiano"  et  "  Gregoriano"  dictis.  Primus  tamen  solus  Romanus 
est  sine  ullo  alio  colore.  Gelasianus  in  Galliam  invectus  saec.  vin 
ineunte,  et  Gregorianus  sub  Carolo  Magno,  ab  Hadriano  Papa,  circa 
A.D.  780  transmissus — ambo  ritus  et  orationes  Gallicanos  Romanis 
immixtos  habent.  "  Ordines  "  etiam  tres  pro  ritibus  conferendi  sunt, 
sc.  Mabillonii  VIII  et  IX  et  ordines  "  Sancti  Amandi "  dicti,  qui  a  viro 
erudito  L.  Duchesne  in  Appendice  libri  Origines  du  culte  chretien 
anno  1889  Parisiis  prima  vice  typis  mandati  sunt.  Qui  omnes  eandem 
simplicitatem  ostendunt. 

XII.  2  Haec  forma  e.g.  in  Leofrici  Exoniensis  Missali  occurit 
(pag.  217  ed.  F.  E.  Warren,  Oxon.,  1883),  in  Pontificali  quodam 
Gemmeticensi  (Martene  de  ant.  eccl.  rit.  t.  ii  p.  367)  et  in  Sarisburiensi 
(vide  Maskell  Monumenta  Ritualia  Eccl.  Angl.  ed.  2  Oxon.  1882  vol. 
ii  p.  282).  Verba  de  mysteriis  celebrandis  et  Admonitio  ad  sacerdote s 
(ib.  p.  246)  pro  exemplo  patribus  nostris  videntur  fuisse  in  ordinatione 
presbyteri.  Haec  forma,  cum  formulis  Canonum  Hippolyti  et  Con- 
stitutionum  Apostolicarum  necessitudine  quadam  coniuncta,  anti- 
quitatem  satis  magnam  redolet,  et,  verbis  de  summo  sacerdotio 
exceptis,  aeque  ad  presbyterum  ordinandum  idonea  videtur.  Sunt  qui 
credant  earn  esse  Romanam  et  abAugustino  Cantuariensi  in  nostrum 
usum  derivatam  fuisse. 


APPENDIX   II  371 

nos  quidem  et  alibi  saeculo  XI  usitata,  hie  citari  potest, 
quae  parem  simplicitatem  exhibeat.  Incipit  Pater  sancte 
omnipotens  Deus  qui  per  Dominumtf.  pro  consecrandis  orat, 
"  ut  antiquitus  instituta  possint  sacramentorum  mysteria 
celebrare.  Per  te  in  summum,  ad  quod  assumuntur, 
sacerdotium  consecrentur,"  sed  nihil  de  sacrificio,  nihil  de 
peccatis  remittendis  loquitur. 

XIII.  De  episcoporum  titulo  simpliciter  et  statim 
respondemus,  nomen  "  summi  sacerdotis,"  nullo  modo 
necessarium  esse,  ad  hoc  officium  in  forma  consecrationis 
describendum.  Ecclesia  enim  Africana  etiam  a  primatibus 
suis  hoc  nomen  manifesto  repudiavit :  l  "  pontificalis " 
autem  "gloria,"  quae  interdum  in  Sacramentariis  invenitur, 
gentilem  vel  iudaicam  dignitatem  potius  quam  ecclesias- 
ticum  ordinem  refert.  Nobis  nomen  episcopi  sufficit,  quod 
officium  eorum  designet  qui,  Apostolis  remotis,  cum 
praecipui  in  Ecclesia  pastores  permanserint,  ordinandi  et 
confirmandi  ius  exercerent  et,  una  cum  presbyteris  pluribus, 
unam  "  parochiam,"  vel  ut  nunc  dicitur  dioecesin,  regerent. 
Quorum  ordini  Papa  se  ipsum,  in  principio  epistulae  suae, 
secundum  morem  maiorum  recte  adnumerat.  Sacerdotes 
sine  dubio  sunt  episcopi,  ut  sunt  presbyteri,  et  eo  nomine 
saeculis  antiquioribus  magis  quam  presbyteri  gaudebant ; 
et  quarto  vel  quinto  demum  saeculo  presbyteri,  saltern 
apud  Latinos,  sacerdotes  pleno  iure  dici  consuescebant. 
Sed  ideo  episcopos  nostris  temporibus  in  forma  consecra- 
tionis "  summos  sacerdotes "  dici  oportere  non  sequitur. 
Aliter  forsan  erat  de  "  sacerdotio  "  episcoporum  saeculis 
antiquioribus,  certe  usque  ad  nonum  et  fortasse  usque  ad 
undecimum,  cum  homo  adhuc  diaconus,  per  saltum,  quod 
dicitur,  saepe  episcopus  sine  presbyteratu  fieret. 2  I  is  ergo 

XIII.  !  Vide  Cone.  Carth  III  (A.D.  397)  canonem  26:  "Ut  primae 
sedis  episcopus  non  appelletur  princeps  sacerdotum,  aut  summus 
sacerdos,  aut  aliquid  huiusmodi,  sed  tantum  primae  sedis  episcopus." 
Huic  autem  concilio  interfuisse  creditur  S.  Augustinus  Hipponensis. 
Locus  de  hoc  nomine  a  Baronio  etc.  citatus  Augustini  certe  non  est. 

XIII.  2  De  hac  re  confer  Mabillonii  commentarium  praevium  in 
ordinem  Romanum  capp.  xvi  et  xviii  (Migne  Pat.  Lat.  torn.  78  pp. 
912-3,  et  919-20)  et  Martene  de  ant.  eccl.  rit.  lib.  I  cap.  viii,  art.  iii, 


372     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

temporibus  certe  idoneum  si  non  necessarium  fuit  sacer- 
dotium  de  eo  praedicari,  ut  in  oratione  quae  adhuc  in 
Pontificali  adhibetur,  scilicet  de  cornu  gratiae  sacerdotalis. 
Sed  cum  haec  consuetude  per  saltum  consecrandi  longo 
tempore  exoleverit  (quamvis  nullo  forsan  statute  prohi- 
bita),  et  episcopus  aliquo  saltern  tempore  sacerdos  exstiterit 
in  presbyteratu,  sacerdotium  denuo  conferri  nunc  non  est 
necessarium,  nee  (si  iudicium  nostrum  ingenue  fateamur) 
rectissimum  et  optimum.  Nee,  cum  secundum  Concilium 
Tridentinum  (sess.  V.  de  Ref.  c.  II  et  sess.  xxiv  de  Ref.  c.  IV) 
"  praecipuum  episcoporum  munus"  sit  praedicatio  evangelii, 
a  Romanis  hoc  exigendum  est.  Ideo  neque  "  summum 
sacerdotium "  neque  "  sacerdotium "  ullum  novum  de 
episcopis  praedicari  est  necesse. 

Nos  tamen,  cum  in  Ordinali  nostro  de  summis  sacer- 
dotibus  et  pontificibus  sileamus,  usum  horum  nominum  in 
aliis  documentis  publicis  non  refugimus.  Exempla  enim 
proferri  possunt  ex  libra  precum  publicarum  etc.  anno  1560 
latine  edito,  ex  epistula  duodecim  episcoporum  pro  Grin- 
dallo  archiepiscopo  A.D.  1580,  et  ex  mandate  archiepiscopi 
nostri  Whitgift  suffraganeo  suo  episcopo  Dovoriensi  dato 
A.D.  I583-1 

sec.  9,  10,  t.  ii  p.  278  sq.,  et  ordinem  Mabillonii  viii  (  =  Martene  i) 
qui  in  codicibus  saec.  ix  invenitur,  ubi  patet  nihil  discriminis  factum 
fuisse  in  forma  si  consecrandus  diaconus  tantum  foret.  Canon  enim 
Sardicensis  xni  in  Occidente  parum  servabatur,  ut,  inter  alia,  ex 
versione  Dionysii  Exigui  patet,  qui  verba  canonis  &v  w  *al  avayv&GTov 
Kal  SiaK&vov  Kai  irpefffivrtpov  virrjpeffiav  ^/creXe'crj  sic  reddit  "  nisi  ante  et 
lectoris  munere  et  officio  diaconi  aut  presbyteri  fuerit  perfunctus." 
Exempla  afferuntur  Johannis  diaconi,  S.  Galli  discipuli  (Walafridus 
Strabo  in  vita  S.  Galli  c.  23-25,  A.D.  625),  Constantini  anti-papae 
(A.D.  767),  et  paparum  Pauli  I  (A  D.  757),  Valentini  (A.D.  827),  et 
Nicolai  I  (A.D.  858).  Hunc  morem  inter  alia  Latinis  obiciebat  Photius 
Constantinopolitanus.  Rem  non  negabat  Nicolaus,  sed  de  promotione 
Patriarchae  ex  laico  Graecos  arguebat,  Ep.  Ixx  ap.  Labb.  et  Cossart. 
Condi,  viii  p.  471  B.  Ordinatio  etiam  diaconi  in  Episcopum  per 
saltum  intellegitur  in  rituali  Syrorum  Nestorianorum  apud  Morinum 
de  sacr.  ord.  parte  n  p.  388,  ed  Antverp.  i695  =  Denzinger  Ritus 
Orientalium  t.  ii  p.  238  (1864). 

XIII.  1  Vide  orationem  pro  clero  et  populo  post  Letaniam  et  Cone. 
Mag.  Brit.  iv.  pp.  293  et  304.  Secundo  loco  Grindallus  a  confratribus 
suis  vocatur  "eximius  Christi  praesul  et  summus  in  Ecclesia  Angli- 
cana  sacerdos  Dei." 


APPENDIX   II  373 

XIV.  Duobus  autem  argumentis  contra  formam  nostram 
prolatis,  quae  praecipue  Papae  placent,  paulo  latius 
respondebimus.  Primum  quidem  est  nos  post  centum 
fere  annos  (A.D.  1662)  post  verba  "  Accipe  Spiritum 
sanctum "  quaedam  addidisse  quae  officium  et  opus 
episcopi  vel  sacerdotis  (cf.  infra  cap.  XV  et  not.  I  et  3) 
designarent.  Et  innuit  verba  ilia  Domini  nostri,  sine 
verbis  postea  additis,  non  per  se  satis  fuisse  sed  manca 
et  non  idonea.  Sed  in  Pontificali  Romano,  cum  con- 
secretur  Episcopus  per  impositionem  manuum  con- 
secratoris  et  assistentium  Episcoporum  forma  sola  est 
"  Accipe  Spiritum  sanctum."  In  Pontificalibus  autem 
recentioribus  nostris  Spiritus  sanctus  invocabatur  per 
Hymnum  "  Veni  Creator,"  Exoniensi  excepto  in  quo 
forma  Romana  additur.  Sequebatur  oratio  de  cornu 
gratiae  sacerdotalis.  Sed,  ut  diximus,  in  nulla  oratione, 
ante  consecrationem  perfectam,  apparet  in  Pontificali 
nomen  episcopi  vel  episcopatus  ;  ita  ut  videantur  Patres 
nostri  anno  1550  et  postea,  si  in  forma  erraverint,  ut  innuit 
Papa,  omisso  nomine  episcopi,  una  cum  ecclesia  Romana 
hodierna  errasse.  Sed  illo  tempore  continuo  apud  nos 
sequebantur  verba  S.  Pauli  quibus  credebatur  memorare 
consecrationem  S.  Timothei  in  episcopum  Ephesium,  et 
manifesto  in  hunc  sensum  usurpata.  Sunt  vero  "  Et 
memento  ut  resuscites  gratiam  Dei  quae  est  in  te  per 
impositionem  manuum.  Non  enim  dedit  nobis  Deus 
Spiritum  timoris  sed  virtutis  et  dilectionis  et  sobrietatis  " 
(2  Tim.  \  6,  7).  Et  recordari  potestis,  fratres,  haec  verba 
sola  a  Concilio  Tridentino  citari,  ut  probet  ordinem  conferre 
gratiam  (sess.  XXIII  de  sacr.  ord.  cap.  ill).  Haec  ergo  forma, 
vel  simplex  ut  in  Pontificali,  vel  duplex  ut  apud  nos, 
abunde  sufficit  ad  creandum  episcopum,  si  intentio  vera 
manifestetur,  quae  patet  per  alias  orationes  et  suffragia 
(quae  officium,  opus  et  ministerium  episcopi  diserte  com- 
memorant),  per  examen  et  similia.  Non  dicimus  vero 
verba  "  Accipe  Spiritum  sanctum "  necessaria  esse,  sed 
sufficientta.  Non  enim  in  Pontificalibus  nostris  antiqui- 
oribus  apparent  neque  in  Romanis,  neque  omnino  in 
Orientalibus.  Sed  cum  Concilio  Tridentino  libenter  con- 


374 

fitemur,  ea  verba  non  frustra  did  ab  episcopis,1  vel  in 
consecratione  episcopi,  vel  in  ordinatione  presbyteri,  cum 
verba  Domini  sint  ad  Discipulos,  ex  quibus  omnia  officia 
nostra  et  potestates  fluxerint,  et  tarn  sacrae  rei  apta  et 
idonea.  In  Diaconatu  non  tarn  idonea  sunt,  itaque  a  nobis 
in  ea  ordinatione  non  adhibentur. 

XV.  Forma  quoque  presbyteri  faciendi  apud  nos  anno 
1550  et  postea  aeque  idonea  fuit.  Oration  e  enim  Euchar- 
istica  finita,  quae  ad  institutionem  Domini  nostri  mentes 
nostras  revocat,  sequebatur  impositio  manuum  ab  Episcopo 
cum  sacerdotibus  assistentibus  facta  cui  coniuncta  est 
forma  imperativa  ex  Pontifical!  desumta,  sed  eadem  plenior 
et  gravior.  (Cf.  cap.  XIX.)  Post  verba  enim  "  Accipe 
Spiritum  sanctum  "  continuo  sequebantur,  ut  in  Pontificali 
Romano  hodierno,  quod  mirum  in  modum  silet  Papa, 
"quorum  remiseris  peccata  remittuntur  eis;  et  quorum 
retinueris  retenta  sunt;"  et  statim  a  Patribus  nostris  ex 
Evangelio  (S.  Luc.  xii  42)  et  S.  Paulo  (i  ad  Cor.  iv  i)  bene 
addita  "  et  sis  fidelis  Dispensator  verbi  Dei  et  sanctorum 
sacramentorum  eius ;  in  nomine  Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus 
Sancti.  Amen."  Quae  forma  nulli  alii  ministro  ecclesiae 
nisi  sacerdoti  congruit,  qui  et  potestatem  clavium  (quae 
vocatur)  habeat  et  verbum  et  mysteria  Dei  populo  solus 
pleno  iure  dispenset,  sive  in  presbyteratu  maneat,  sive  in 
episcopatum  ad  maiora  munera  promotus  fuerit.  Deinde 
sequebatur,  ut  nunc  sequitur,  collatio  potestatis  praedicandi 
et  ministrandi  sacramenta,  ubi  quis  ad  haec  constitutus 
fuerit  minister,  cum  traditione  Bibliorum  sacrorum,  quae 
nostro  iudicio  instrumenta  praecipua  ministerii  sacri  sunt, 
et  cetera  in  se  (iuxta  ordinis  gradum  proprium)  compre- 
hendunt.  Et  ob  causam  Gordonianam  forsan  non  inutile 
fuerit  explicare,  has  formas  non  verbis  tantum  sed  re 
difierre.  Prima  enim,  quae  cum  impositione  manuum 
coniungitur,  "  Accipe  Spiritum  sanctum "  cum  verbis 
sequentibus,  dat  facultates  et  potestates  sacerdotii  gene- 
rales,  et,  ut  dici  solet,  characterem  imprimit.  Secunda 
autem,  cum  traditione  Bibliorum,  dat  auctoritatem  ut  ille 

XIV.  l  Vide  Cone.  Trid.  sess.  xxiii  de  sacr.  ord.  can.  iv. 


APPENDIX  II  375 

qui  ordinatus  sit  Deo  publice  ministret  et  potestatem 
exerceat  super  fideles  qui  unicuique  in  parochia  sua  vel 
cura  animarum  committendi  sunt  Quae  mandata  simul 
iuncta  omnia  necessaria  sacerdotio  Christiano  comprehen- 
dunt  et,  nostro  iudicio,  clarius  ostendunt  quam  in  sacra- 
mentariis  et  pontificalibus  factum  est.  Neque  enim  nomen 
ipsum  "sacerdotis"  et  similia  declinamus  aut  in  Libro 
precum  publicarum  sen  ministerii  ecclesiasticae  administra- 
tionis  sacramentorum,  etc,  sub  Elizabetha  Regina  A.D.  1560 
latine  edito,  aut  in  aliis  documentis  publicis  latina  lingua 
conceptis.1  Et  hoc  non  sine  significatione  factum  videtur, 
cum  in  versionibus  Biblicis  nostris,  saeculo  XVI  editis, 
verbum  tepej/?  id  est  "  sacerdos "  per  "  Priest "  reddatur 
(quod  in  Ordinali  Anglicano  semper  usitatur,  et  saepissime 
in  officio  Eucharistico  et  alibi)  ;  Trpea-fivrepos  autem  i.e. 
"  Presbyter  "  vertitur  "  Elder  "  id  est  "  Senior." 

Cum  ergo  verba  ad  officiuin  et  opus  episcopi  vel  sacerdotis 
(ut  nos  Latine  reddere  solemus  "  the  office  and  work  of  a 
priest")  anno  1662,  addita  essent,  non  videtur  Romanae 
controversiae  gratia  factum,  sed  ad  erudiendas  Presby- 
terianorum  mentes,  qui  in  nostro  libro  fundamentum  suis 
opinionibus  quaerebant.  Historicis  bene  notum  est  eo 
tempore  certamen  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae  cum  eis  viris  et 
aliis  novatoribus,  rege  occiso  et  regis  filio  expulso  et 
ecclesiastico  statu  everso,  multo  acerbius  fuisse  quam  cum 
Romanis.  Addita  sunt  vero  verba  non  ut  formam  sensu 
liturgico  perficerent.  Mutationes  enim  illae  longius  nos  a 
Pontificalibus  trahebant  non  propius  adducebant.  Scopus 
ergo  additamenti  erat  ut  differentia  ordinis  manifestaretur. 
Addita  sunt  etiam  eodem  tempore  alia  eiusdem  generis 
contra  novatores,  velut  in  Letania  precationes  contra 
"  rebellionem "  et  contra  "  schisma,"  oratio  pro  Magna 
Curia  Parlamenti  et  pro  stabilitate  pacis  internae  et 
religionis,  et  orationes  quatuor  temporibus  dicendae. 

XV.  J  E.g.  in  articulis  religionis  anni  1562,  in  canonibus  anni  1571 
et  alibi  :  vide  Cone.  Mag.  Brit.  torn.  iv.  pp.  236,  263,  429.  Similiter  in 
versione  graeca  libri  nostri,  anno  1665  Cantabrigiae  edita'Iepwo-tfi'ij  et 
lepeuj  in  ordinali  et  in  officio  Eucharistico  et  alibi  leguntur.  In 
quibusdam  versionibus  latinis  "presbyter"  potius  reperitur. 


376     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Quae  Papam  latere  forsan  non  mirandum  est ;  sed  haec 
omnia  difficultatem  monstrant  libri  nostri  interpretandi  ex 
separatione  gentium  et  ecclesiarum  ortam.1 

Sed  forma  saeculi  XVI  per  se  non  modo  sufficiens  sed 
abunde  sufficiens  erat.  Oratio  enim  Omnipotens  Deus, 
omnium  bonorum  dator,  quae  pro  vocatis  "  in  officium 
sacerdotii "  Deum  apprecatur  ut  Ipsi  fideliter  in  hoc  officio 
deserviant,  pars  formae  tune  temporis  erat  et  ab  episcopo 
immediate  ante  examen  dicebatur.2  Nunc  vero,  cum 
verba  nova  eandem  sententiam  diserte  exprimant  in  alium 
locum  remota  est  et  pro  collecta  diei  sumitur. 

Hanc  etiam  mutationem  Papam  fugisse  non  miramur : 
sed  res  animadversione  digna  est.  Observamus  enim  eum 
in  hac  parte  litterarum  aliquantulum  cunctari,  cum  innuat 
formam  anni  1662  forsan  in  se  sufficientem  aestimari 
debere,  si  modo  centum  fere  annis  antiquior  fuisset  (§  7). 
Opinionem  etiam  eorum  theologorum  videtur  amplecti, 
qui  formam  non  in  oratione  vel  benedictione  una,  vel 
precativa  quam  dicunt  vel  imperativa,  sed  in  serie  tota 
formularum  vinculo  quodam  morali  coniunctarum,  con- 
stare  credant.  Pergit  enim  disputare  de  auxilio  causae 
nostrae  "  novissime,"  ut  credit,  "  arcessito  ab  aliis  eiusdem 
Ordinalis  precibus."  Quae  provocatio  nostra  nullo  modo 
nova  est,  sed  facta  fuit  saeculo  XVII  cum  iam  argumentatio 

XV.  l  Vide  G.  Burnet  Hist.  Ref.  up.  144  (1680)  et  Vindication  of 
O ruinations  of  Ch.  of  Eng.  p.  71  (1677);  H.  Prideaux  Eccl.  Tracts 
pp.  15,  36,  69-72  etc.  (1687)  ed.  2,  1715  ;  cf.  eiusdem  epistulam  ap. 
Cardwell  Conferences  p.  387-8  n.,  ed.  3  Oxon.  1849. 

XV.  2  Operae  pretium  est  hanc  orationem  annorum  1550  et  1552 
hie  referre,  cum  verba  ilia  ad  officium  et  opus presbyteri  vel  sacerdotis 
tarn  magni  Romae  aestimentur. 

"  Omnipotens  Deus,  omnium  bonorum  dator,  qui  per  Spiritum 
sanctum  tuum  varios  ministrorum  ordines  in  Ecclesia  tua  constituisti  ; 
Respice  propitius  hos  famulos  tuos  in  officium  sacerdotii  iam  vocatos  ; 
et  eos  doctrinae  tuae  veritate  et  innocentia  vitae  ita  adimple,  ut 
tarn  ore  quam  bono  exemplo  tibi  in  hoc  officio  fideliter  deserviant, 
ad  gloriam  tui  Nominis  et  ad  Congregationis  profectum.  Per  merita." 
Haec  oratio  notionem  "  benedictionis "  Deus  honorum  omnium 
breviter  exprimit.  Sunt  qui  credant  "bonorum"  variam  lectionem 
esse  pro  "  honorum." 


APPENDIX   II  377 

Romana  de  verbis  additis  primum  innotesceret.1  Neque 
ilium  ab  opinione  Johannis  Cardinalis  de  Lugo  credimus 
dissentire  qui  docet  totam  ordinationem  unam  actionem 
efficere,  nee  referre  si  materia  et  forma  ab  invicem 
seiunctae  sint  (ut  in  Pontificali  fit)  si  ea  quae  intercedant 
moraliter  coniungantur.2 

XVI.  Argumentum  autem  praecipuum  et  firmissimum 
illud  Papae  videri  credimus  quod  non  de  verbis  in  forma 
nostra  additis,  sed  de  cerimoniis  et  orationibus  in  cetera 
actione  peragenda  a  nobis  sublatis,  nos  incuset.  Scribit 
enim  (§  7):  "  Nam  ut  cetera  praetereantur  quae  eas  (preces) 
demonstrent  in  ritu  Anglicano  minus  sufficientes  proposito, 
unum  hoc  argumentum  sit  instar  omnium,  de  ipsis  consulto 
detractum  esse  quidquid  in  ritu  catholico  dignitatem  et 
officia  sacerdotii  perspicue  designat.  Non  ea  igitur  forma 
esse  apta  et  sufficiens  sacramento  potest,  quae  id  nempe 
reticet  quod  deberet  proprium  significare."  Et  infra  addit 
quae  partim  falsa  sunt,  partim  lectores  in  errorem  facillime 
abductura,  et  Patribus  nostris  et  nobis  iniqua : — "  Toto 
Ordinali  non  modo  nulla  est  aperta  mentio  sacrificii, 
consecrationis,  sacerdotii,  potestatisque  consecrandi  et  sacri- 
ficii offerendi :  sed  immo  omnia  huiusmodi  rerum  vestigia 
.  .  .  sublata  et  deleta  sunt  de  industria"  (§  8).  Et  alio 
loco,  magna  (piget  dicere)  cum  rerum  ignorantia,  scribit  de 
parte  "ea  Anglicanorum,  non  ita  magna,  recentiore  tern- 
pore  coalita,  quae  arbitratur  posse  idem  Ordinale  ad  sanam 
rectamque  sententiam  intelligi  et  deduci."  Deinde  a  nobis 
negari  et  adulterari  sacramentum  ordinis  affirmat,  nos 
repudiare  (in  Ordinali  scilicet)  omnem  notionem  consecra- 
tionis et  sacrificii,  et  dicit  officia  presbyteri  et  episcopi 
restare  "  nomina  sine  re  quam  instituit  Christus."  His 

XV.  l  Vide  Gilb.  Burnet  Vindication  pp.  8,  71,  qui  scribit  haec 
additamenta  Ordinationi  non  essentialia  esse  sed  explicationes  tan- 
turn  esse  eorum  "  quae  antea  per  alias  harum  formularum  partes 
satis  clara  fuerant;"  et  Humf.  Prideaux  Eccl.  Tracts  p.  117  qui 
orationem  Omnipotens  Deus  exscribit  et  de  ea  disputat.  Similia 
scripserat  J.  Bramhall  (1658)  Works  A.  C.  L.  iii  pp.  162-9,  Oxon. 
1844. 

XV.  *  De  sacramentis  in  gen.  disp.  ii.  sec.  v  §  99,  t.  iii  p.  293-4, 
Paris.  1892. 


378    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

duris  et  inconsultis  verbis  respondimus  iam  ex  parte, 
monendo  incertam  et  periculosam  viam  ab  eo  iniri  qui  ex 
coniectura  tantum  ecclesiae  nostrae  actus  interpretetur,  et 
sibi  ius  adsumat  novi  decreti  proponendi  de  ordinis  forma 
necessaria,  quod  episcopos  nostros  legitimos,  saeculo  decimo 
sexto  ecclesiam  gubernantes,  ob  regulam  illis  plane  incog- 
nitam,  damnet.  Ecclesiarum  particularium  libertas  in 
ritibus  reformandis  non  ita  pro  arbitrio  Romae  tollenda 
est.  Nam,  ut  infra  partim  monstrabimus,  "  ritus  catho- 
licus"  nullo  modo  unus  est,  sed  multum  inter  se  variant 
ritus  etiam  a  Romanis  approbati. 

Sed  tacet  intentionem  ecclesiae  nostrae  ex  praefatione 
Ordinalis  nostri  notissimam,  tacet  principium  a  Patribus 
nostris  semper  propositum  quod  actus  eorum  sine  interpre- 
tatione  inimica  explicat. 

XVII.  Intentio  certe  ecclesiae  nostrae,  non  partis  re- 
center  coalitae,  ex  titulo  Ordinalis  et  praefatione  eidem 
praefixa  abunde  patet.  Titulus  quidem  anno  1552  erat 
"  Ordo  et  ritus  faciendi  et  consecrandi  Episcopos  Presby- 
teros  et  Diaconos."  Praefatio  autem,quae  statim  sequitur, 
sic  incipit : — "  Manifestum  est  omnibus,  Sacram  Scriptu- 
ram  et  veteres  auctores  diligenter  perlegentibus,  exstitisse 
in  Ecclesia  Christi  ex  Apostolorum  temporibus  hosce 
ministrorum  ordines,  Episcopos,  Presbyteros  et  Diaconos. 
Quae  quidem  munera  ita  magni  semper  aestimabantur,  ut 
nemo  auderet  privata  sua  auctoritate  ullo  eorum  fungi, 
nisi  qui  iam  vocatus  esset,  probatus,  examinatus,  et  eidem 
sustinendo  par  esset  satis  cognitus :  et  praeterea  per  preces 
publicas  cum  impositione  manuum  ad  id  approbatus  et 
admissus.  Igitur  eo  fine  ut  isti  Ordines  in  Ecclesia 
Anglicana  conserventur  et  reverentia  debita  usurpentur 
et  aestimentur  :  necessarium  est  neminem  (nisi  qui  iam 
Episcopus,  Presbyter  aut  Diaconus  sit)  ullo  eorum  fungi, 
nisi  qui  secundum  ritum  sequentem  ad  id  vocatus,  pro- 
batus, examinatus  et  admissus  fuerit."  Infra  autem  dicit 
inter  alia  "quisque  autem  in  Episcopatum  consecrandus 
annum  tricesimum  complevisse  debet."  Et  in  ritu  ipso 
"  Consecratio "  Episcopi  saepius  memoratur.  Successio 


APPENDIX   II  379 

etiam  et  propagatio  horum  officiorum  a  Domino  per 
Apostolos  et  ceteros  ecclesiae  antiquae  ministros  diserte 
significatur  in  orationibus  "  Eucharisticis  "  quae  praemit- 
tuntur  verbis  Accipe  Spiritum  sanctum.  Intentio  igitur 
Patrum  nostrorum  fuit  haec  officia  a  primis  temporibus 
derivata  conservare  et  propagate  "  et  reverentia  debita 
usurpare  et  aestimare,"  eo  nimirum  sensu  quo  ab  Apostolis 
recepta  sunt  et  eo  usque  in  usu  erant  Quod  a  Papa 
indebite  siletur. 

XVIII.  Sed  Leo  papa  haec  omnia  et  similia  "nomina 
sine  re  quam  instituit  Christus "  vocat  At  contra  prin- 
cipium  fundamentale  nostrorum  Patrum  fuit  omnia  ad 
auctoritatem  Domini  in  sacris  Scripturis  revelatam  revo- 
care.  Cerimonias  ergo  ab  hominibus  confectas  et  additas 
rescindebant,  etiam  illam  notissimam  codicem  Evangeliorum 
tenendi  super  caput  episcopi  ordinandi,  dum  benedictio 
funditur  et  manus  imponuntur,  qua  et  Latinis  et  Orien- 
talibus  hodie  communis  est,1  quamvis  ecclesiae  Romanae 
antiquae  incognita. 

Una  igitur  materia  in  imprimendo  charactere  utebantur 
nostri,  sc.  impositione  manuum,  una  in  tradenda  potestate 
publice  ministrandi  et  facultates  exercendi  super  gregem 
unicuique  commissum,  sc.  Bibliorum  vel  Evangeliorum 
traditione,  quam  ex  ritu  novum  episcopum  inaugurandi  et 
similibus  videntur  adsumsisse,  ut  in  Pontificali  manet 
Evangeliorum  traditio  post  annulum  episcopo  datum. 
Ceteras  velut  traditionem  instrumentorum  et  ornamen- 
torum,  benedictionem  et  unctionem  manuum  et  capitis, 
cum  orationibus  consequentibus,  recentius  institutas,  et  in 
Ordinale  antiquum  Romanum  ex  aliis  plerumque  gentibus 
et  praesertim  ex  Gallia  acceptas,  pleno  iure  rescindebant. 

XVIII.  1  Vide  Constitutiones  Apost.  viii.  4  et  Statuta  Ecclesiae 
antiquae  canone  2,  quae  Gallicana,  ex  provincia  Arelatensi,  videntur, 
quamvis  interdum  falso  nomine  Concilii  Carthaginensis  IV  circum- 
ferantur.  Hunc  ritum  ab  ecclesia  Romana  alienum  fuisse  diserte 
testatur  auctor  libri,  qui  in  Alcuini  nostri  operibus  editur,  de  divinis 
officiis  cap.  xxxvii.,  saec.  fortasse  xi.  :  "  non  reperitur  in  auctoritate 
veteri  neque  nova,  neque  in  Romana  traditione."  (Migne  P.L.  torn, 
joi  p.  1237.)  Et  sic  Amalarius  de  eccl.  off.  ii  14  (P.L.  105  p.  1092). 
De  usu  in  consecratione  papae  vide  Mabilkm.  Ord.  ix  5. 


380     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Porrectio  instrumentorum,  ut  satis  notum,  ex  formulis 
ordinum  minorum  fluxit,  et  Pontificalibus  ante  saeculum 
XI  incognita  fuit,  quo  tempore  a  scriptoribus  primum 
memorari  videtur.  Hac  reformata  recidebat  etiam  formula 
nova  "  Accipe  potestatem  offerre  sacrificium  Deo  missam- 
que  (vel  ut  in  Pontifical!  Romano  "  missasque  ")  celebrare 
tarn  pro  vivis  quam  pro  defunctis,"  etc.  Oratio  vero  ad 
benedicendas  manus  etiam  ante  saec.  XVI  ad  placitum 
episcopi  dici  vel  dimitti  poterat.  Unctio  Gallicana  et 
Britannica  est,  non  Romana.  Non  enim  solum  a  libris 
"  Leoniano  "  et  "  Gelasiano  "  abest,  sed  ab  ordinibus  vin  et 
IX  Mabillonii  et  a  "  S.  Amandi,"  qui  saeculi,  ut  videtur, 
Vlll-ix  consuetudinem  repraesentant.  Porro  saeculo  nono 
Nicolaus  Papa  I  scribit  A.D.  874  ad  Rudolfum  Bituricen- 
sem,in  Romana  ecclesia  nee  presbyterorum  nee  diaconorum 
manus  chrismate  inungi.1  Primus  qui  aliquid  tale  com- 
memorat  est  Gildas  Britanntcus.2  Similia  etiam  dici 
possunt  de  unctione  capitis,  quae  ex  imitatione  consecra- 
tionis  Aaronicae,  ut  alia  plura,  manifeste  fluxerit,  et 
saeculo  IX  vel  X  extra  Rom  am,  ut  ex  Amalario  (de  eccl.  off. 
ii.  14)  et  Pontificalibus  nostris  colligi  potest,  primum 
apparuerit.3 

Restat  Benedictio  Gallicana  Deus  sanctificationum 
omnium  auctor,  quae  ex  abundanti  Benedictioni  Romanae 
addita  est  (cap.  xn),  et  similiter  a  Patribus  nostris  reiecta 
est.  Quae  oratio  verbis  interpolatis  manifeste  corrupta,  ut 
in  Pontificali  Romano  habetur,  doctrinae  transsubstantia- 
tionis,  a  nobis  reiectae,  favere  videbatur,  et  in  se  vix  intellegi 

XVIII.  1  Migne  Pat.  Lat.  torn.  119  p.  884,  ubi  numerator  epist.  66. 
Cf.  et  Martene  de  ant.  ecc.  rit.  lib.  i  cap.  viii  art.  ix  sec.  9  et  14.  Haec 
Nicolai  responsio  "  Praeterea  sciscitaris  "  in  Gratiani  Decreto  dist.  xxiii. 
cap.  12  inseritur. 

XVIII.  "^  E pis  tola  §  1 06  p.  in  ed.  Stevenson,  1838,  qui  bene- 
dictionem  memorat  "  qua  initiantur  sacerdotum  vel  ministrorum 
manus."  Unctio  manuum  presbyterorum  et  diaconorum  in  Sacra- 
mentariis  Anglicanis  saeculorum  x  et  xi  praescribitur. 

XVIII.  3  Confer  Cone.  Trid.  Sess.  xxiii  de  sacr.  ord.  canone  v,  quod 
cum  videatur  admittere  in  ordinatione  unctionem  "non  requiri," 
anathematizat  eos  qui  earn,  et  alias  ordinis  cerimonias,  "  contemnendas 
et  perniciosas  "  dixerit. 


APPENDIX   II  381 

poterat,  ita  ut  liturgiae  in  lingua  vulgari  dicendae,  ad  populi 
nostri  aedificationem,  nullo  modo  idonea  videretur.  Eadem 
tamen,  qualiscunque  sit,  nihil  de  potestate  sacrificandi 
docet. 

XIX.  Quid  mirum  ergo  si  orationes  illas  ex  liturgia, 
lingua  vulgari  recitanda,  resecarent  Patres  nostri  ut  ad 
simplicitatem  Evangelii  redirent?  In  quo  viam  viae 
a  Romanis  initae  oppositam  certe  sequebantur.  Romani 
enim  a  simplicitate  paene  Evangelica  incipientes,  suorum 
rituum  severitatem  ornamentis  Gallicanis  distinxerunt,  et 
cerimonias  a  Vetere  Testamento  traductas  decursu 
temporis  addiderunt,  ut  discrimen  inter  populum  et 
sacerdotes  etiam  atque  etiam  significaretur.  Quas  ceri- 
monias nullo  modo  "  contemnendas  et  perniciosas,"  aut 
suis  locis  et  temporibus  inutiles  dicimus,  sed  non  necessarias 
esse  profitemur.  Saeculo  ergo  XVI  cum  Patres  nostri 
liturgiam,  in  usum  tarn  plebisquam  cleri  ordinarent,  paene 
ad  origines  Romanas  reversi  sunt.  Utrique  enim,  et  Patres 
eorum  sancti,  et  nostri,  quos  novatores  dicunt,  eosdem 
duces  fidissimos  sequebantur,  Dominum  et  Apostolos. 
Nunc  vero  ecclesiae  hodiernae  Romanae  exemplum,  quae 
tota  in  ofiferendo  sacrificio  occupatur,  quasi  exemplar 
unicum  nobis  proponitur.  Quod  a  Papa  tarn  strenue 
factum  est,  ut  scribere  non  dubitet  de  Ordinalis  nostri 
precibus  "  consulto  detractum  esse  quidquid  in  ritu 
catholico  dignitatem  et  officia  sacerdotii  perspicue  designet" 

(§7). 

At  nos  fidenter  asserimus  Ordinale  nostrum,  in  hac 
praesertim  re,  Pontificali  Romano  variis  modis  praestare, 
cum  et  ea  quae  ex  institutione  Christi  ad  naturam  sacer- 
dotii attinent  (§  9),  et  effectum  rituum  catholicorum  in 
Ecclesia  universa  usitatorum,  clarius  et  fidelius  exprimat. 
Quod  ex  collatione  Pontificalis  et  Ordinalis,  nostro 
quidem,  iudicio,  ostendi  potest. 

Formula  Romana  incipit  cum  praesentatione  ab  Archi- 
diacono  facta  et  duplici  adlocutione  episcopi,  prima  ad 
clerum  et  populum,  secunda  ad  ordinandos — in  ordina- 
tione  enim  presbyteri  examen  nullum  publice  fit.  Sequitur 


382     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

impositio  manuum  episcopi,  et  deinde  presbyterorum 
assistentium,  sine  ullis  verbis  effecta ;  de  quo  ritu  perplexo 
Cardinalis  de  Lugo  iudicium  citavimus  (cap.  XV).  Deinde 
dicuntur  orationes  tres  antiquae,  duae  breves  et  Bene- 
dictio  longior  (cap.  XII),  quae  ab  episcopo  "  extensis 
manibus  ante  pectus  "  iam  dicitur.  Haec,  quae  in  antiquis 
libris  "  Consecratio  "  dicitur,  ab  auctoribus  probatis,1  post 
Morinum,  vera  ordinationis  Romanae  forma  creditur,  et 
cum  impositione  manuum  olim  sine  dubio  coniungebatur  : 
nunc  vero,  ut  in  Confirmatione  fit  (cap.  X),  extensio 
manuum  pro  impositione  adhibetur,  nee  tamen  ipsa 
necessaria  creditur.  Certe,  si  ordinationes  Romanae 
antiquae  valent,  hac  oratione  dicta  ordinatio  presbyter- 
orum etiam  nunc  in  ista  ecclesia  perfecta  est.  Ilia  enim 
forma  quae  semel  pro  aliquo  sacramento  Ecclesiae  suffe- 
cerit,  et  adhuc  intacta  et  integra  retineatur,  eadem  mente 
retenta  credi  debet ;  nee  sine  sacrilegio  quodam  asseri 
potest  earn  virtutem  suam  perdidisse,  cum  alia  post  earn 
tacite  addita  sint.  Propositum  vero  partis  recentioris 
formulae  Romanae  non  id  certe  fuit  ut  partem  anti- 
quiorem  vi  propria  evacuaret ;  sed  non  inepte  credi  potest 
hoc  fuisse,  ut  sacerdotes  iam  ordinati  primo  ad  sacrificium 
offerendum  variis  ritibus  et  cerimoniis  praepararentur, 
deinde  ut  potestatem  offerendi  diserte  traditam  acciperent, 
tertio  ut  iidem  in  missa  celebranda  ius  sacerdotii  usur- 
parent,  denique  ut  alia  potestate  sacerdotali,  peccata 
scilicet  remittendi,  publice  ornarentur.  Quae  sententia 
ex  verbis  Pontificalium  veterum  confirmatur,  ut  e.g.  in 
Pontificali  Sarisburiensi  legitur  "  Benedic  et  sanctifica  has 
manus  sacerdotum  tuoruiu."  Haec  igitur  omnia  quae  post 
antiquam  illam  formam  sequuntur,  sicut  verba  nostra  anno 
1662  addita,  simpliciter  non  necessaria  sunt.  Potestates 
enim  istae  vel  implicite  et  ex  usu  tradi  possunt,  ut  apud 
antiquos  fiebat,  vel  statim  et  diserte ;  sed  ad  ordinationis 
efficaciam  modus  traditionis  nullo  modo  pertinet. 

Quae  cum  partim  perspexissent  patres  nostri,  et  viderent 

XIX.  l  Vide  Martene  de  ant.  eccl.  rit.  \  cap.  vin  art.  IX  §  18  t. 
ii  p.  320  ed.  Rotom.  1700,  et  Gasparri  Tract,  Can,  de  s.  ord.  §  1059. 
Paris  1893. 


APPENDIX   II  383 

doctrinam  scholasticam  circa  transsubstantiationem  panis 
et  vini,  et  recentiorem  de  sacrificio  crucis  in  missa  (ut 
credebatur)  repetito,  populari  sensu  cum  quibusdam  ex 
sequentibus  cerimoniis  et  orationibus  coniungi,  apud  se 
quaerebant  quomodo  ritus  ille  totus  non  modo  integrior 
et  purior,  sed  perfectior  et  nobilior  evaderet.  Et  cum  eo 
tempore  de  antiquitate  orationum  primarum  nullo  modo 
constaret,  sed  doctorum  sententiae  formis  imperativis 
omnem  virtutem  tribuerent,  animos  suos  ad  has  potius 
quam  ad  illas  advertebant. 

In  quern  finem  primo  simplicitatem  persequebantur,  et 
totius  ritus  partes  ad  unum  quasi  culmen  dirigebant,  ita 
ut  nemo  dubitare  posset  quo  momento  gratia  et  potestas 
sacerdotii  daretur.  Ea  est  enim  simplicitatis  vis  ut  animos 
hominum  magis  ad  divina  evehat  quam  series  longa 
cerimoniarum,  quamvis  rectissima  voluntate  coniunctarum. 
Orationibus  ergo  praemissis,  quae  et  officium  sacerdotii 
et  successionem  a  ministerio  Apostolorum  declarabant, 
impositionem  manuum  cum  verbis  Domini  nostri  iunge- 
bant.  Et  in  hac  re  exemplum  Ecclesiae  Apostolicae  con- 
sulto1  secuti  sunt,  quae  primo  "  ad  orationem  se  converte- 
bat,"  deinde  manus  imponebat  et  ministros  suos  dimittebat, 
non  Romanae,  quae  impositionem  manuum  primo  adhibet. 
Secundo,  cum  de  variis  sacerdotii  officiis  secum  reputarent, 
videbant  Pontificale  vulgatum  circa  duas  res  defici.  Cum 
enim  in  adlocutione  episcopi  haec  officia  recenserentur 
"  sacerdotem  oportet  offerre,  benedicere,  praeesse,  praedi- 
care  et  baptizare "  vel  similia,  et  in  forma  antiqua  pro 
presbyteris  de  "  ratione  dispensationis  sibi  creditae  red- 
denda"  dictum  esset,  in  ceteris  tamen  formis  nihil  nisi  de 
sacrificio  offerendo  et  de  peccatis  remittendis  dicebatur, 
et  eae  potestatum  collationes  longius  ab  invicem  seiunge- 
bantur.  Videbant  etiam  pastoralis  officii  munera  parum 
habere  loci  in  Pontificali,  quamvis  de  illis  Evangelium 
plenissime  eloquatur.  In  ipsa  ergo  praeclara  adlocutione 
ab  episcopo  pronuntianda,  et  in  examine  dignissimo  quod 

XIX.  1  Vide  adlocutionem  Archiepiscopi  ad  populum  in  consecra- 
tione  Episcopi,  et  Act.  xiii  3.  Cf.  vi  6  et  xiv  22, 


384     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

sequitur,  officium  pastorale,  quod  est  praesertim  Nuntii, 
Speculatoris  et  Dispensatoris  Domini,  sacerdotibus  nostris 
praecipue  proponebant :  quae  nisi  quis  legerit  et  perpen- 
derit,  et  cum  sacris  Scripturis  comparaverit,  Ordinalis 
nostri  virtutem  plane  non  novit.  Quod  vero  ad  sacra- 
menta  attinet,  in  formis  imperativis  recensendis  Domini 
nostri  verbis  primum  locum  dabant,  non  ex  reverentia 
tantum  sed  quia  eo  tempore  haec  verba  pro  forma  neces- 
saria  vulgo  crederentur.  Deinde  omnia  "  sacramentorum 
mysteria  antiquitus  instituta"  (ut  sacramentarii  nostri 
veteris  verbis  utamur ;  vide  cap.  XII 4)  sacerdotibus  nostris 
commendabant,  non  unius  tantum  partem,  aliis  post- 
habitis,  extollebant.  Denique  formam,  quae  characterem 
imprimit,  cum  forma  quae  iurisdictionem  confert,  una 
collocabant. 

Et  in  his  et  similibus,  quae  longum  esset  recensere, 
exemplum  Domini  nostri  et  Apostolorum  sine  dubio 
sequebantur.  Non  enim  solum  dixisse  memoratur 
Dominus  "  Hoc  facite  in  meam  commemorationem "  et 
"  Euntes  ergo  docete  omnes  gentes  baptizantes  eos," — ut 
rite  ministranda  sacramenta  doceret,  set  multa  et  ob- 
servatione  dignissima  de  pastorali  officio,  et  suo,  qui  Pastor 
bonus  est,  et  discipulorum  suorum  qui  exemplo  Illius 
moniti  vitas  suas  ponere  pro  fratribus  debent  (Confer 
Evangelium  S.  Johannis  x  11-18  et  I  Ep.  Joh.  iii  16.) 
Multa  quoque  in  Evangelio  tradidit  de  praedicatione 
verbi,  de  dispensatione  servis  electis  commissa,  de 
missione  Apostolorum  et  discipulorum  suo  loco,  de  pec- 
catorum  conversione  et  remissione  delictorum  in  Ecclesia, 
de  ministerio  invicem  faciendo,  et  cetera  similia.  Hoc 
ergo  modo  Sapientiae  divinae  placebat  praesertim  Nun- 
tios,  Speculatores  et  Dispensatores  suos  erudire,  ut 
mundo,  post  discessum  Eius,  testimonium  darent,  et 
plebem  sanctam  in  Adventum  suum  rite  praepararent. 
Et  quod  fecerat  Dominus  fecerunt  et  Apostoli.  Testis 
S.  Petrus  cum  Seniores,  id  est  presbyteros  et  episcopos, 
ut  Consenior  obsecrat  "  pascite  qui  in  vobis  est  gregem 
Dei,"  et  "  cum  apparuerit  Princeps  pastorum,  precipietis 
immarcessibilem  coronam"  (i  Pet.  v  1-4).  Testis 


APPENDIX   II  385 

S.  Paulus  cum  presbyteros  et  episcopos  Ephesios  ad- 
monet  voce  (Act.  xx  18-35)  et  cum  Epistula  insigniter 
spirituali  erudit  (Eph.  iv  11-13).  Testis  S.  Gregorius 
Papa,  cui  gens  Anglicana,  per  totum  mundum  iam  dis- 
persa,  tantum  debet,  qui  in  libro  suo  de  regula  Pastorali 
multus  est  de  his  rebus  et  de  moribus  pastorum,  sed  de 
sacrificio  offerendo  paene  aut  omnino  silet  Qui  liber 
tanto  in  honore  erat  ut  episcopis  saeculo  IX  infra  ipsam 
ordinationem  daretur,  una  cum  libro  canonum,  addita 
monitione  ut  vitas  suas  secundum  eius  praecepta  re- 
gerent.1 

Sanctus  etiam  Petrus,  qui  Pastorale  officium  tanto  cum 
studio  presbyteris  commendat,  in  priori  parte  eiusdem 
epistulae  totam  plebem,  ut  sacerdotium  sanctum,  de 
spiritalibus  hostiis  Deo  offerendis  admonet  (i.  Pet.  ii 
5  et  9)-  Quod  demonstrat  illud  presbyteris  magis  pro- 
prium  esse,  cum  personam  Dei  adversus  homines  re- 
praesentet  (Ps.  xxiii  [xxii],  Es.  xl  10,  n,  Jerem.  xxiii 
1-4,  Ezech.  xxxiv  11-31),  hoc  quodammodo  cum  plebe 
communicari.  Sacerdos  enim,  cui  dispensatio  sacramen- 
torum  et  praesertim  Eucharistiae  consecratio  mandetur, 
nunquam  solus  ministrare  debet,  sed  semper  cum  plebe 
astante  et  participante  altari  deservit.2  Et  sic  prophetia 

XIX.  1  Hoc testatur  Hincmarus  in  praefatione  Opusculi LV Capitu- 
lorum  :  Migne  Pat.  Lat.  torn.  126  p.  292. 

XIX.  2  Hoc  ex  Liturgiis  Graecis  antiquis  et  Missali  Romano  con- 
stat,  in  quibus  paene  omnia  plurali  numero  dicuntur.  Confer  e.g. 
Ordinem  Missae :  "  Orate  fratres  ut  meum  ac  vestrum  sacrificium 
acceptabile  fiat  apud  Deum  Patrem  Omnipotentem"  ;  et  in  Canone 
"  Memento  Domine  famulorum  famularumque  tuarum  N.  et  N.  et 
omnium  circumstantium  .  .  .  [pro  quibus  tibi  offerimus,  vel]  qui  tibi 
offerunt  hoc  sacrificium  laudis,"  et  postea  :  "  Hanc  igitur  oblationem 
servitutis  nostrae  sed  et  cunctae  familiae  tuae,"  etc.  De  his  lege  e.g. 
S.  Petrum  Damianum  in  libro  Dominus  vobtscum  cap.  viii,  de  verbis 
"  pro  quibus  tibi  offerimus  etc. "  :  "  patenter  ostenditur  quod  a  cunctis 
fidelibus  non  solum  viris  sed  et  mulieribus  sacrificium  illud  laudis 
offertur,  licet  ab  uno  specialiter  offerri  sacerdote  videatur.  Quia, 
quod  ille  Deo  offerendo  manibus  tractat,  hoc  multitudo  fidelium 
intenta  mentium  devotione  commendat " ;  et  de  "  Hanc  igitur " : 
"  Quibus  verbis  luce  clarius  constat  quia  sacrificium,  quod  a  sacer- 
dote sacris  altaribus  superponitur,  a  cuncta  Dei  familia  generaliter 
offeratur." 

2    C 


386     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

Malachiae   (i   n)  impletur,  et  per  oblationem  Ecclesiae 
mundam  magnum  est  Dei  nomen  in  gentibus. 

Respondemus  ergo  nos,  Sacris  Scripturis  insistentes,  in 
sacerdotibus  constituendis  dispensationem  et  ministerium 
verbi  et  sacramentorum,  potestatem  peccatorum  remittendi 
et  retinendi,  et  cetera  pastoralis,  officii  munera,  recte 
inculcare  et  praedicare,  et  omnia  alia  in  eis  resumere  et 
recapitulare.  Cuius  rei  et  ipse  Papa  testis  est,  qui  Pontifi- 
calis  apicis  honorem,  ex  triplici  commendatione  gregis 
Christi  S.  Petro  paenitenti  data,  maxime  deducit.  At 
quod  in  se  tarn  honorificum  reputat,  cur  in  sacerdotibus 
Anglicanis  nihil  ad  dignitatem  et  officia  sacerdotii  con- 
ferre  credit  ? 

XX.  In  finem  fratrem  nostrum  in  Christo  venerandum 
monitum  velimus  ne  iniquus  sit  in  hac  sententia  proferenda 
non  solum  nobis  sed  et  aliis  Christianis,  et  inter  eos  ante- 
cessoribus  suis,  qui  aeque  certe  secum  Spiritu  sancto  frue- 
bantur.  Orientales  enim  nobiscum  ob  defectum  intentionis 
damnare  videtur,  qui  in  Confessione  orthodoxa,  circa  annum 
1640  edita,  duas  tantum  sacerdotii  sacramentalis  potestates 
nominent  scilicet  solvendi  delicta  et  praedicandi ;  qui  et  in 
Catechismo  longiore  Russico,  Mosquae  anno  1839  edito, 
nihil  de  sacrificio  corporis  et  sanguinis  Christi  decent,  et 
officia  tantum  sacramenta  ministrandi  et  gregem  pascendi 
inter  ea  quae  ad  ordinem  pertinent,  commemorant.  Porro 
de  tribus  ordinibus  ita  loquuntur  : — "  Diaconus  sacramentis 
inservit :  Presbyter  sacramenta  consecrat,  sub  episcopo : 
Episcopus  non  tantum  ipse  sacramenta  consecrat,  sed 
potestatem  habet  per  manuum  impositionem  aliis  imperti- 
endi  donum  et  gratiam  ut  ilia  consecrent."  Nobiscum 
certe  mysteriorum  plurium  ministerium  sacerdotibus  magis 
convenire,  quam  unius  sacrificii  oblationem,  decent. 

Et  hoc  quidem  in  forma  apud  Graecos  nunc  usitata 
apparet,  in  oratione  quae  incipit  Deus  qui  magnus  es  in 
potentia  : — "  hunc  quern  voluisti,  ut  subiret  gradum  Pres- 
byteri,  imple  dono  sancti  tui  Spiritus,  ut  fiat  dignus  qui 
assistat  inculpatus  sanctuario  tuo,  praedicet  Evangelium 
tui  regni,  administret  verbum  tuae  veritatis,  offerat  tibi 


APPENDIX   II  387 

dona  et  sacrificia  spiritualia,  renovet  populum  tuum  per 
lavacrum  regenerationis  "  etc.  (Habert  Lib,  Pontif.  p.  314, 
ed.  1643). 

Sed  de  Patribus  suis,  quorum  ordinationes  supra  descrip- 
simus,  quid  iudicaturi  sint  etiam  atque  etiam  Romani 
videant.  Si  enim  Patres  nostros  ante  annos  ducentos  et 
quinquaginta  invalide  ordinatos  novo  decreto  Papa  pro- 
nuntiet,  nihil  obstat  quominus  omnes  simili  modo  ordinatos 
ordines  nullos  accepisse,  eodem  Jure,  necessario  decern- 
endum  sit.  Et  si  Patres  nostri,  qui  formis,  ut  dicit, 
annis  1550  et  1552  nullis  uterentur,  nullo  modo  eas 
reformare  anno  1662  possent,  sui  quoque  eidem  legi 
subiacent.  Et  si  Hippolytus  et  Victor  et  Leo  et  Gelasius 
et  Gregorius,  in  ritibus  suis,  partim  parum  de  sacerdotio  et 
de  summo  sacerdotio,  et  nihil  de  potestate  offerendi  sacri- 
ficium  corporis  et  sanguinis  Christi  dixerint,  ecclesia  ipsa 
Romana  sacerdotium  nullum  obtinet,  et  Sacramentariorum 
reformatores,  quocunque  nomine  gauderent,  nihil  pro  riti- 
bus sanandis  efficere  poterant.  "  Hierarchia  enim  "  ut  ait, 
"  extincta "  ob  nullitatem  formae,  "  potestas  ordinandi 
nulla  fuit."  Et  si  Ordinale  "  valere  ad  usum  ordinationum 
minime  possit,  nequaquam  decursu  aetatum,  quum  tale 
ipsum  permanserit,  futurum  fuit  ut  valeret.  Atque  ii 
egerunt  frustra,  qui  inde  a  [saeculis  VI  et  XI]  conati  sunt 
admittere  aliquid  sacrificii  et  sacerdotii,  [et  de  peccatis 
remittendis  et  retinendis],  nonnulla  dein  ad  ordinale  facta 
accessione."  Et  sic,  una  cum  nostris,  omnes  ordines  suos 
subvertit  Papa,  et  iudicium  propriae  ecclesiae  infert. 
Eugenius  quippe  IV  magnum  periculum  nullitatis  eccle- 
siae suae  intulit,  cum  doceret  novam  materiam  et  formam 
ordinis,  et  ne  verbo  quidem  veras  attingeret.  Nemo  enim 
scit  quot  ordinationes,  eo  docente,  factae  fuerint  sine  ulla 
impositione  manuum  aut  forma  idonea.  Leo  autem 
formam  prioribus  Romanis  episcopis  incognitam,  et  in- 
tentionem  in  Orientalium  catechismis  deficientem,  postulat. 

Ad  summam,  cum  ad  nos  haec  omnia  nomine  pacis  et 
unitatis  afferantur,  notum  omnibus  esse  volumus  nos 
aequo  saltern  studio  pacem  et  unitatem  in  Ecclesia  prose- 
qui.  Quae  autem  frater  noster  Leo  Papa  XIII  in  aliis 


388     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

litteris  de  tempore  in  tempus  scripsit  aliquando  verissima 
esse,  et  semper  bona  cum  voluntate  scripta,  agnoscimus. 
Discrimen  enim  et  disceptatio  inter  nos  et  ilium  ex 
diversa  interpretatione  eiusdem  Evangelii  oritur,  quod 
unice  verum  omnes  credimus  et  veneramur.  Multa  etiam 
in  ipso  amore  et  reverentia  digna  esse  libenter  profitemur. 
Sed  error  ille  apud  Romanes  inveteratus  capitis  visibilis 
pro  Christo  invisibili  substituendi,  verba  eius  bona  fructu 
pacis  privabit  Quid  Christus  ergo  voluerit  in  ministerio 
Evangelico  constituendo  nobiscum  patienter,  quaesumus, 
fratres  reverendissimi,  expendatis.  Hoc  prius  facto  alia 
sequentur  tempore  suo  cum  Deus  voluerit. 

Faxit  Deus  ut  etiam  ex  hac  controversia  oriatur  plenior 
veritatis  notitia,  patientia  maior,  et  amplius  pacis  desiderium 
in  Ecclesia  Christi,  Salvatoris  mundi. 

F.  CANTUAR  : 
WILLELM  :  EBOR  : 

Data  est  haec  epistula  feria  sexta  die  xix 
mensis  Februarii  A.S.  1897. 


APPENDIX.— DE  CAUSA  JOHANNIS  GORDON 

Johannes  Gordon,  de  quo  in  capitulo  VII  breviter  dis- 
seruimus,episcopusGallovidiensis  in  Scotia  meridionali  anno 
1688  in  ecclesia  Cathedrali  Glasguensi  sacratus  est.  Qui 
regem  Jacobum  II  in  exilium  secutus,  postea  in  ecclesiam 
Romanam  receptus  est  et  sub  condicione  denuo  baptizatus 
est.  Idem  nomen  dementis  Papae  tune  regnantis  suo  prae- 
nomini  addidit.  Hie  vir,  ut  notum  est,  ex  eodem  Pontifice 
postulavit,  petitione  vel  memorial i  quae  hodie  exstat,1  ut 

App.  *  Vide  M.  Le  Quien  Nullite"  des  Ordinations  Anglicanes 
torn.  ii.  App.  pag.  Ixix-lxxv,  Paris  1725 — cui  subsequitur  decretum 
S.  Officii.  Confer  E.  E.  Estcourt  The  question  of  Anglican  Ordina- 
tions discussed  (Lond.  1873)  App.  xxxvi  pp.  cxv  sq.,  qui  aliud  sum- 
marium  vel  argumentum  causae  et  aliam  decreti  subsequentis 
formam,  aliqua  cum  cura  repetita,  typis  mandavit.  Carta  regis 
pro  consecratione  (post  electionem)  data  est  4  die  Februarii,  et 
signata  4  Septembris  1688  :  summarium  consecrationem  die  19 
Septembris  habitam  refert. 


APPENDIX   II  389 

ordines  Romano  ritu  susciperet.  Cuius  libelli  non  opus 
est  ut  omnia  argumenta  recenseamus.  Sufficit  dicere  ea 
maxima  a  veritate  rerum  abhorrere.  Fundamentum  est 
fabula  de  Parked  archiepiscopi  consecratione.  De  materia, 
forma  et  intentione  scribit :  "  Nulla  materia  utuntur  nisi 
forte  traditione  Bibliorum,  nulla  forma  legitima  :  imo 
formam  Catholicorum  abiecere  et  commutavere  in  hanc : 
Accipe  potestatem  praedicandi  verbum  Dei  et  administrandi 
sancta  eius  Sacramento, ;  quae  essentialiter  differt  a  formis 
orthodoxis.  Deinde  quae  intentio  ab  illis  formari  poterit, 
qui  negant  Christum  aut  primam  Ecclesiam  ullum  incru- 
entum  instituisse  sacrificium  ? "  Nullam  ergo  rationem 
habuit  verioris  materiae  et  formae  apud  nos  usitatae, 
scilicet  impositionis  manuum  et  verborum  "  Accipe 
Spiritum  sanctum"  et  quae  tune  ut  nunc  anteibant  et 
sequebantur.  Quid  vero  sibi  vellet  Gordon  cum  hoc 
facinus  in  se  admitteret,  nescimus. 

Hac  ergo  ex  petitione,  quae  formam  ordinationis 
presbyterorum  solum  tetigit,  causam  Clemens  XI  iudicavit: 
et  facile  credebatur  ab  eis,  qui  historiam  ex  libro  Michaelis 
Le  Quien  tan  turn  cognovissent,secundum  mentem  Johannis 
Gordon  simpliciter  iudicasse.  Res  tamen  aliter  cecidit,  ut 
constat  ex  summario,  quod  decreto  praefigitur,  quod  Est- 
court  anno  demum  1873  typis  mandavit,  et  quod  miro 
modo  in  hac  controversia  neglectum  fuit,  et  ex  litteris 
Leonis  Papae  XIII,  qui  scribit: — "Qua  de  forma,  quo 
plenius  esset  certiusque  iudicium,  cautum  fuerat  ut  exem- 
plar Ordinalis  anglicani  suppeteret."  Summarium  enim, 
die  consecrationis  et  ceteris  huiusmodi  prius  recitatis,  ita 
pergit  : — "  Actio  sic  fere  peragebatur.  Primo,  fiebant 
preces  secundum  Liturgiam  Anglicanam.  Secundo,  habe- 
batur  concio  ad  populum  de  dignitate  et  officio  episcopi. 
Tertio,  supradicto  Johanne  genibus  provoluto,  omnes 
supradicti  pseudo-episcopi  imposuerunt  manus  capiti  et 
humeris  dicendo  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum  ;  et  memento  ut 
suscites  gratiam  quae  in  te  est  per  manuum  impositionem, 
non  enim  accepimus  spiritum  timoris,  sed  virtutis  dilectionis 
et  sobrietatis.  Quarto,  peractis  pauculis  precibus  pro 
gratiarum  actione,  terminata  fuit  actio."  Sequitur  decreti 


390    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

forma,  quae,  priori  in  parte,  ab  ilia  quam  suppeditat  Le 
Quien  satis  differt,  quamvis  illi  non  contradicat.  Exemplar 
autem  summarii  et  decreti,  ut  ab  Estcourt  editur,  ex  S. 
Officio  prodiit  die  2  Aprilis  anno  1852,  et  Angelum 
Argenti,  ipsius  S.O.  notarium,  testem  habuit ;  ita  ut  pro 
documento  vero  teneri  possit. 

Notabit  prudens  lector  primo  formam  consecrationis 
episcopi  hie  tantum  citari,  cum  Gordon  in  petitione 
(quamvis  falso)  formam  ordinationis  presbyterorum  solum 
respexisset.  Unde  statim  exoritur  quaestio  an  S.O. 
Johannis  Gordon  dicta  de  ordinatione  presbyterorum  pro 
veris  habuerit,  necne  ?  Si  enim  vera  crediderit,  iudicium 
eius,  tali  mendacio  suffultum,  nullum  est :  si  falsa,  quare 
nihil  de  ea  forma  accuratius  tradidit  ?  Sectmdo  observabit, 
formam  hie  citatam  non  esse  earn  quae  anno  1688,  saltern 
in  Anglia,  in  usu  erat,  sed  priorem,  annorum  scilicet  1550 
et  1552.  Non  enim  habet  verba  anno  1662  addita  ad 
officium  et  opus  episcopi  in  ecclesia  Dei  quod  iam  tibi  commit- 
tttur,  etc.;  et  verba  ab  omnibus  consecratoribus  prolata 
dicuntur.  Porro  tarn  neglegenter  collata  fuit  forma  ut 
gratiam  progratiam  Dei,  et  non  enim  accepimus  pro  non  enim 
dedit  nobis  Deus  (2  Tim.  I.  7,  secundum  S.  Hieronymum) 
substituta  sint.  Nee  tamen,  tertio,  cum  illis  libris,  nee  cum 
recentiori,  actionis  descriptio  revera  concordat.  Nusquam 
enim  in  Ordinalibus  nostris  impositio  manuum  "  humeris  " 
praescribitur ;  et  multa,  sicut  praesentatio,  examen, 
hymnus  Vent  Creator,  silentio  praetereuntur.  Quod  vero 
in  summario  "  quarto "  dicitur,  nullo  modo  verum  est. 
Post  verba  enim  Accipe  Spiritum  sanctum  e.q.s.  sequitur 
traditio  Bibliorum  sacrorum  cum  forma  altera  imperativa 
Attende  lectioni,  exhortationi,  et  doctrinae,  etc.  Deinde 
sacra  Cena  celebratur.  Denique  annis  1550  et  1552  seque- 
batur  tantum  oratio  una  (Super  huncfamulum  tuum,  qiiae- 
sumus,  Pater  misericors)  cui  anno  1662  subiuncta  est  altera 
(Actiones  nostras)  cum  benedictione  (Pax  Dei  quae  ex- 
superaf).  "  Pauculae"  vero  "preces  pro  gratiarum  actione  " 
nusquam  sunt.  Porro  "  concio"  in  libris  annorum  1550  et 
1552  non  praecipitur,  sed  primum  in  Ordinali  anni  1662 
apparet — quamvis  probabile  sit  concionem  fuisse.  Haec 


APPENDIX  II  39I 

ergo  collatio  Ordinalis  Anglicani,  qualecunque  id  fuerit, 
saltern  quatenus  ex  summario  iudicari  possit,  neglegen- 
tissima  fuit,  et  ad  ordinationem  presbyterorum  forsan  non 
extendit:  certe,  quacunque  ex  causa  fuerit,  de  ea  silet. 
Quod  vero  de  mentione  omissa  traditionis  Bibliorum,  in 
consecratione  Episcopi,  dici  debeat,  nescimus.  Verba  "sic 
fere  peragebatur "  neglegentiam,  in  tarn  gravi  causa 
culpabilem,  indicare  videntur. 

^  Hactenus  omnia  ex  documentis  iam  cognitis  descripsimus. 
Sed  addit  Papa  ex  scriniis,  ut  videtur,  secretis  S.  Officii, 
quod  nobis  antea  incognitum  fuit:  "in  sententia  tamen 
ferenda  omnino  seposita  est  ea  causa  (*.*.  Parkeri  con- 
secratio)  ut  documenta  produnt  integrae  fidei,"  et  statim  : 
"neque  alia  ratio  est  reputata  nisi  defectus  formae  et 
intentionis."  Quae  sunt  ergo  ista  "documenta  integrae 
fidei "  et  quos  et  quales  defectus,  si  ullos,  formae  et  inten- 
tionis commemorant?  An  defectus  in  consecratione 
episcopi  sunt  ?  Vel  in  ordinatione  presbyterorum  ?  Aut 
in  ambabus  ?  Haec  maximi  momenti  sunt,  si  res  ex 
aequo  iudicanda  sit.  Papa  quidem  disputat  sententiam 
illam  nihil  momenti  a  traditionis  instrumentorum  defectu 
duxisse,  et  rationem  subiungit  "  tune  enim  praescriptum 
de  more  esset  ut  ordinatio  sub  conditione  instauraretur." 
Quae  argumentatio  turn  in  seipsa  debilis  est,  turn  videtur 
demonstrare  documenta  ista  nihil  revera  commemorare  de 
genere  defectus,  cum  id  ex  coniectura  tantum  colligatur. 
Et  quaerere  licet,  an  revera  illo  tempore  mos  iste  ob- 
tinuerit.  Exempla  enim,  quae  ex  annis  1604  et  1696 
citantur,  non  de  cerimonia  omissa  sunt,  sed  de  presbyteris 
ad  instrumenta  tradenda  ab  episcopo  ordinante  delegatis 
(Le  Quien  ii  pp.  388-394).  Anno  etiam  1708  cum 
Capuccinus  quidam,  cum  porrectione  patenae,  sed  sine 
hostia,  casu  ordinatus  esset,  decrevit  Congregatio  Concilii 
integram  ordinationem  sub  conditione  iterandam  quasi  de 
re  nova  decerneret.1  Hoc  anno  quaestio  non  fuit  de 

App.  l  Vide  P.  Gasparri  Tract,  canonic,  de  sacr.  ordinal,  sec.  1084 
(torn.  ii.  p.  261,  Paris  1894).  Similis  causa  de  altero  Capuccino,  sub- 
diacono,  resoluta  fuit  ab  eadem  Congregatione  10  die  Jan.  1711  : 
vide  Thesaurum  Resolutionum  torn,  ixparte  2,  p.  165. 


392     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

omissione  totius  cerimoniae  sed  de  parte  eius  tantum. 
Quaestio  de  omissione  cerimoniae  integrae  postea,  ut 
videtur,  agitabatur,  cum  "quidam  sacerdotio  initiandus, 
etsi  omnes  consuetas  manuum  impositiones  ab  Episcopo 
accepisset,  ad  Episcopum  tamen,  solita  Patenae  cum 
hostia,  et  Calicis  cum  vino  instrumenta  porrigentem,  ad 
alia  tune  temporis  distractus,  non  accessisset."  Scribit 
enim  Benedictus  XIV  in  libro  suo  de  Synodo  Dioecesana, 
qui  Romae  primum  anno  1748  edebatur,  quod  super 
quaestionem  illam  "  priusquam  huic  operi  extremam 
manum  admoveremus,  fuit  in  Sacra  Congregatione  Con- 
cilii  disceptatum  "  (lib.  viii.  cap.  x).  De  anno  silet,  sed 
satis  longo  tempore  post  causam  Gordonianam  videtur 
fuisse :  et,  etiam  tune,  quaestio  non  exorta  est  de  omis- 
sione cerimoniae  istius  consulto  facta  sed  fortuita.  Si  ergo, 
circa  annum  1/40,  Congregatio  Concilii  de  iteranda  ordina- 
tione  huius  rei  gratia  disceptaret  et  non  sine  longo,  ut 
videtur,  consilio  "  sub  conditione "  iterandam  rescriberet, 
anno  1704  mos  iste  vix  obtinuit. 

Sed  summarium  et  decretum  S.  Officii,  certe  secundum 
interpretationem  a  Papa  traditam,  vix  conciliari  possunt 
cum  documento  alio  quod  ex  illo  corpore  ante  dies  octo 
aut  novem  prodiisse  dicitur,  et  in  Collectaneis  etiam  S.  C. 
de  propaganda  fide  anno  1893,  sub  numero  1170,  ex  parte 
insigniori  typis  mandatum  fuit.  Responsionem  dicimus 
de  Aethiopum  Monophysitarum  ordinationibus,1  in  qua 

App.  J  Vide  de  ritu  Aethiopum  illo  tempore  I  obi  Ludolfi  Cotn- 
mentarium  in  Hist.  Aethiop.  pp.  323-8  Francof.  ad  M.  1691.  Dubia 
de  his  ordinationibus  proposita  et  responsionem  consultorum  su- 
premae  Inquisitionis  primus  quantum  scimus  evulgavit,  Benedicti 
XIV  temporibus,  Philippus  de  Carboneano  (1707-1762),  ex  Fratribus 
minoribus,  Professor  Collegii  urbani  de  propaganda  fide,  in  Appendi- 
cibus  ad  Theol.  Moral,  univ.  Pauli  G.  Antoine,  Romae  anno  1752 
(p.  677  sq.),  et  alibi  saepe  editis,  ut  Ven.  1778  (ill.  I,  p.  172)  Taurini 
anno  1789  (v  p.  501  sq.)  et  Avenione  1818  (v  p.  409).  Quod  de 
Appendicibus  in  Concinae  J^heol.  Mor.  scribit  Gasparri,  Tract.  Can. 
de  sacr.  Ord.  sec.  1057  Paris  1893,  nobis  non  liquet.  De  hac  causa 
vide  etiam  E.  E.  Estcourt,  The  question  of  Anglican  ordinations  dis- 
cussed (Lond.  1873)  in  appendicibus  xxxiii,  xxxiv  etxxxv,  ubi  formulae 
ordinationum  Coptorum  et  Aethiopum,  Resolutiones  S.  Officii 
annorum  1704  et  1860,  et  litterae  (24  Nov.,  1867)  Ludovici  P.  J.  Bel, 


APPENDIX   II  393 

ut  constat,  ordinationes  presbyterorum  neglegentissimae 
approbantur,  solum  tactu  manus  et  verbis  Accipe  ^piritum 
sanctum  effectae,  sine  ulla  alia  materia  et  forma  nisi  forsan 
ea  quae  in  oratione  contineatur  quae  de  sacerdotio  omnino 
silet.1 

Hoc  documentum  iam  videmus  a  quibusdam  "  votum 
consultoris  merum  "  dici,  et,  quantum  fieri  potest,  repudiari. 
Sed  patet  aliquam  responsionem  huiusmodi  illo  tempore 
datam  fuisse :  in  responsione  enim  S.C.S.O.  anni  1860 
occurrunt  verba  "  detur  responsio  huius  S.C.  Supremae 
Inquisitionis  fer.  IV  9  Apr.  1704."  Sequitur  responsio  a 
theologis  Romanis  edita,  sed  nunc  repudiata.  Et  huius 
documenti  sententiam  anno  1875  Cardinalis  Patrizi,  secre- 
tarius  S.C.S.O.,  pro  virili  parte  extenuavit,  P.  Franzelini, 
postea  Cardinalis,  verbis  usus,  quamvis  non  omnia  ab  eo 
scripta  divulgaverit. 

Si  haec  ergo  responsio  vera  et  genuina  est,  quaerere  licet 
an  S.  O.  formam  ordinationis  nostrae  pro  presbyteris 
approbavit,  et  formam  consecrationis  episcopi  tantum 

Episcopi  Agathopolitani  et  Vicarii  Apostolic!  Abyssiniae,  typis 
mandatae  sunt.  Vide  etiam  P.  Gasparri  Tract,  Can.  de  sacr.  Ord. 
sec.  1057  et  1058,  qui  addit  litteras  Cardinalis  Patrizi  secretarii  S.C.S. 
Officii  ad  Cardinalem  Manning  30  Apr.  1875  datas.  Confer  etiam 
Revue  Anglo- Romaine  torn.  i.  pp.  369-375  (1896)  ex  qua  Collectanea 
Propagandae  citamus,  et  A.  Boudinhon  in  Le  Canoniste  Contemporain 
torn.  XX  pp.  5-10,  Paris  1897,  qui  quaedam  alia  Romae  recenter  edita 
addit.  Ph.  de  Carboneano  responsionem  sub  die  10  Aprilis  (i.e. 
feria  v)  refert,  quern  sequitur  Manning,  nee  repugnat  Patrizi. 
Responsio  anni  1860  et  Collectanea  Propagandae  diem  9  Aprilis 
memorant. 

App.  1  Ordinationis  formam  Aethiopicam  pro  presbytero  subiungi- 
musab  Ludolfo  anno  1691  editam  Comment  in  Hist.  Aeth.  p.  328  : — 

"  Deus  mi,  Pater  Domini  et  Salvatoris  nostri  Jesu  Christi,  respice 
hunc  servum  tuum,  et  largire  illi  spiritum  gratiae  et  consilium 
sanctitatis,  ut  possit  regere  populum  tuum  in  integritate  cordis.  Sicut 
respexisti  populum  electum,  et  mandasti  Moysi,  ut  eligeret  seniores, 
quos  replevisti  eodem  spiritu  quo  donaveras  servum  tuum  et  famulum 
tuum  Moysen.  Nunc  autem,  Domine  mi,  da  isti  servo  tuo  gratiam 
quae  nunquam  deficit :  conservans  nobis  gratiam  spiritus  tui  et 
competentem  portionem  nostram  ;  supplens  in  nobis  cultum  tuum  in 
corde,  ut  celebremus  te  sincere.  Per  etc." 

Forma  ab  episcopo  L.  P.  J.  Bel  repetita  parum  differt  (Estcourt 
p.  cxiii). 


394    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

improbavit  ?  Plane  nescimus  :  sed  non  adeo  incredibile 
est.1 

Si  falsa  et  supposititia  est,  ubi  gentium  vera  evanuit? 
et  cur  falsa  tarn  diu  et  tarn  publice  locum  eius  tenuit?  Et 
quis  posthac  credat  S.O.  de  tali  controversia,  vel  etiam  de 
indole  documentorum  suorum,  idoneum  testem  esse  ? 

Has  ob  causas  iure  dicimus  tenebras  S.  Officio  circum- 
fusas  a  litteris  Papae  Leonis  parum  dissipatas  fuisse. 
Documenta  penes  S.O.  conservantur,  et  publici  iuris  fieri 
debent  si  veritati  rerum  consulendum  sit.  Ut  nunc  tamen 
res  manet,  nemo  est  qui  non  iudicet  causam  Gordonianam 
imbecillo  et  invalido  firmamento  esse,  si  quis  ordines 
nostros  ob  praxim  curiae  Romanae  nullos  esse  probare 
voluerit. 

App.  l  Credit  Gasparri  Paulum  IVordinationesnostras  propresby- 
teris  et  diaconis  approbasse  :  De  la  valeur  des  Ordinations  Anglicanes 
pp.  14,  15,  45,  Paris  1895.  Cf.  supra  p.  12. 


APPENDIX  III 

LEONIS  PAPAE  XIII   EPISTULA  AD    ARCHIEPISCOPOS 

ANGLIAE. 

Illustrissimi  ac  Reverendissimi  Domini, — 

CUM  vestris  litteris  libellus  una  nobis  est  redditus 
quern  vos  Constitutioni  nostrae  obiciendum  duxistis, 
quam  de  ordinationibus  ritu  Anglicano  actis  anno  su- 
periori  edidimus.  Singula,  quae  profertis,  prosequi,  alieni 
officii  est.  Id  tamen  non  videt  nemo,  quemadmodum 
Nos  quaestionem  de  vestris  ordinationibus  baud  aliter 
potuisse  aggredi  dirimendam  atque  ex  praescriptis  catho- 
lici  dogmatis,  ita  quae  vos  de  ipsis  ordinationibus,  de 
sacerdotio,  de  S.  Eucharistia  et  sacrificio  profitemini, 
longe  abesse  nimirum  ab  iis  quae  a  Catholica  et  Romana 
Ecclesia  traduntur.  Ex  delata  Nobis,  etsi  inmerito,  fidei  et 
sacramentorum  custodia  detrectare  officium  nequaquam 
potuimus,  quod  Nobis  est  adversus  Deum  animosque 
Christi  sanguine  redemptos  :  quamobrem  meditata  iterum 
diuque  causa,  nihil  cunctandum  ulterius  iudicavimus, 
ordinationes  ritu  vestro  actas  irritas  edicere  omninoque 
nullas.  Quamquam  tamen,  dum  ita  Nos  religioni  officii 
responderemus,  spe  laetabamur  non  defuturos  qui  senten- 
tiam  nostram  aequo  animo  habituri  essent  in  eamque 
ituri,  celari  tamen  vos  nolumus  doluisse  etiam  quod 
persuasum  erat,  sententiam  eandem  moleste  pluribus 
ferendam  esse,  qui  quum  fide  bona  secus  ac  nos  cogita- 
rent,  difficile  adducendi  essent  ut  veritatem  addiscerent 
Praeiudicatae  enim  opiniones,  studia  partium,  mentium  a 
pueris  informatio,  ipse  denique  consuetudinum  patriarum 
amor,  quibus  ex  amplitudine  gentis  dignitas  accedere 
videatur,  mirum  quantam  in  animos  vim  exerceant,  ut 

395 


396     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

facile  idcirco  pervideremus  eos,  quibus  de  re  nulla  foret 
adhuc  iniecta  dubitatio,  in  deteriorem  fere  partem  iudicium 
nostrum  esse  accepturos.  Damus  namque  ultro,  homines 
ab  catholica  imitate  seiunctos  alienisque  doctrinis  a 
teneris  imbutos,  quamdiu  veritas  non  apte  satis  aperteque 
proponatur,  bona  sinceraque  fide  duci  posse.  Scrutator 
autem  cordium  Deus  unus  est.  Id  porro  solatio  nos 
afficit  maxime,  studium  religionis  acre  per  Britanniam 
vigere ;  nee  modo  in  iis  qui  anglicanis  ritibus  favent, 
verum  etiam  in  ceteris  plerisque,  qui  aeque  a  Catholicis 
atque  ab  Anglicanorum  communitate  dissident.  Saepe 
nobis  de  hac  re  confirmavit  dilectus  filius  Noster  West- 
monasteriensis  archiepiscopus  ;  qui  multa  de  vestratum 
sinceritate  rettulit  tuendaeque  religionis  industria,  oper- 
amque  suspexit  quae  istic  datur  plurime  in  earn  partem  ut 
religiosa  institutio  maneat  in  populo,  comprimatur  intem- 
perantia  potus,  morum  continentia  custodiatur,  aequa 
plebi  et  opificibus  levatio  provideatur.  Praeclaras  hasce 
dotes  moralesque  virtutes  et  catholicas  traditiones,  quae 
in  vobis  adhuc  vigent,  a  vetustate  acceptas  dum  animo 
reputamus,  vehementi  incendimur  desiderio  ut  earn 
demum  repetat  ecclesiae  Christi  unitatem,  quam  maximo 
emolumento  insignique  laude,  diuturno  saeculorum  spatio, 
gens  vestra  tenuit.  Quod  si  hae  nostrae  industriae,  quae 
Christi  caritatem  unice  spectant  sempiternamque  anima- 
rum  salutem,  optatos  nondum  exitus  sunt  habiturae,  at 
liceat  saltern  ad  constans  precandi  studium  impense 
enixeque  hortari,  quo  nihil  necesse  magis  ad  unitatem 
fovendam.  Nemo  quippe  venit  ad  Christum  nisi  Pater 
traxerit  eum. 

Litteras  non  ita  pridem  dedimus  ad  catholicos  universes 
de  Spiritu  Sancto  exorando,  videlicet  ut  idem  Spiritus, 
cuius  est  docere  omnem  veritatem  et  caritatem  Dei 
diffundere  in  cordibus,  gentes  omnes,  casque  maxime  quae 
Christiano  censentur  nomine,  eodem  fidei  et  caritatis 
vinculo  coniungat.  Quidni  illi  etiam,  qui  in  vobis  sincere 
adamant  divinae  obsequi  voluntati,  hortatione  nostra 
utantur  ? 

Nos  quidem  vestris    occasionem    oblatam    litteris   per- 


APPENDIX   III  397 

libenter  nanciscimur,  ut  vos  ceterosque  omnes,  qui  re- 
ligiosae  unitati  student,  de  propensissima  voluntate 
nostra  certiores  iterum  faciamus.  Cor  plane  nostrum 
patet  ad  vos,  eo  nempe  amore  impellente,  quo  Romani 
Pontifices  nationem  vestram  nullo  non  tempore  sunt 
prosequuti,  quemque  Nos  Pontifici  qui  succedet,  sua- 
vissimae  veluti  haereditati,  transmissuri  sumus.  Interea, 
adprecantibus  benignissima  Christi  Matre  Maria,  Petro 
Apostolorum  Principe,  Gregorio  et  Augustino,  quorum 
opera  lux  evangelii  genti  vestrae  est  invecta,  omnipotentem 
Deum  enixe  obsecramus,  ut  divitias  in  vos  bonitatis  Suae 
uberrime  effundat. 

Ex  aedibus  Vaticanis,  die  xx  Junii  MDCCCXCVII. 


APPENDIX   IV 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Of  Books,  etc.,  marked  with  an  asterisk*  I  have  no  knowledge  at 
first  hand. 

Reviews  of  Books  are  not  included  unless  they  present  some 
features  of  special  interest. 

DALBUS,  FERNAND  [F.  Portal].    Les  Ordinations  Angli- 

canes.    [La  Science  Catholique.] l    Arras,  1893-4 
GASPARRI,  P.    Tractatus  Canonicus  de  Sacra  Ordinatione. 

Vol.  I,  pp.  x-444 ;  Vol.  II,  pp.  399.     Paris,  1893-4 
BOUDINHON,  A.     De  1'Ordre  et  des  Ordinations  (a  propos 

d'un  livre  recent).      [Bulletin  de  1'Institut  Catholique 

de  Paris  ;  pp.  178-88.]     Paris,  1894 
* Etude  theologique  sur  les  Ordinations  Anglicanes. 

[Le  Canoniste  Contemporain,  Juin  et  Juillet.]     Paris, 

1894 
DuCHESNE,     L.       Les     Ordinations     Anglicanes ;     par 

F.    Dalbus  ;    compte   rendu.      [Bulletin    Critique,  1 5 

Juillet]     Paris,  1894 
WORDSWORTH,  JOHN  (Bishop  of  Salisbury).     De  Validi- 

tate  Ordinum  Anglicanorum  Responsio  ad  Batavos. 

pp.  23.     Salisbury,  1894 
*  Trois  Lettres  sur  la  position  de  1'Eglise  Anglicane. 

Salisbury,  1894 
CARINI,   S.J.,   Franc.    M.    Monsignor   Niccolo   Ormaneto, 

Nunzio   Apostolico  alia   Corte  di  Filippo   II  Re  di 

Spagna,  1572-77.     pp.  vii-142.     Rome,  1894 

1  Also  en  brochure,  pp.  40.  Arras,  1894.  Second  Edition  with 
letters  from  Cardinal  Bourret,  the  Archbishop  of  Albi,  and  the  Bishops 
of  Cahors  and  of  Salisbury.  Paris,  1894. 

398 


APPENDIX   IV  399 

*  CAMM,  O.S.B.,  Bede.     La  Controverse  sur  les  Ordina- 

tions Anglicanes.  [Revue  Benedictine,  Tome  XI, 
pp.  529-40  ;  Tome  XII,  pp.  123-33.]  i894~5 
VAN  SCHAIK,  G.  C,  and  others.  De  la  Validite  des 
Ordinations  Anglicanes  :  Lettre  a  1'Episcopat  vieux- 
catholique  de  Hollande  par  la  Commission  chargee 
d'etudier  cette  question,  pp.  43.  Rotterdam,  1895 

*  CROWE,  J.     Anglican  Orders  and  the   Theory  of  the 

Intention  of  the  Minister.  [Irish  Ecclesiastical  Record, 
pp.  7-17.]     Dublin,  1895 

DELASGE,   GUSTAVE.     Validite    des   Ordinations   Angli- 
canes.    pp.  32.     Paris,  1895 

c  De  Hierarchia  Anglicana  Dissertatio 
DENNY,  EDWARD.  J  Apologetica.  Praefante  R.D.  Saris- 
LACEY,  T.  A.  I  buriensi  EpoT  pp.  xvi-265.  London, 


LAURAIN,  P.  Le  Renouvellement  des  Ordinations.  [Le 
Canoniste  Contemporain,  2o8e  Livraison.  pp.  193- 
212.]  Paris,  1895 

BOUDINHON,  A.  Ordinations  Schismatiques  Coptes  et 
Ordinations  Anglicanes.1  pp.  32.  Paris,  1895 

--  De  la  validite  des  Ordinations  Anglicanes.    pp.  89. 

Paris,  1895 
LEHMKUHL,    S.J.,    AUG.     Intentio    und  forma    bei    den 

Sakramenten.  [Theologischpraktische  Monats-Schrift, 

pp.  599-604.]     Passau,  1895 

TOURNEBIZE,  S.J.,  F.  L'Eglise  d'Angleterre  a-t-elle 
r£ellement  le  Sacerdoce  ?  [Etudes  Religieuses,  Tome 
Ixiv,  pp.  400-23,  574-605].  Paris,  1895 

-  le  Mouvement  Religieux  en  Angleterre.  [Etudes 
Religieuses,  Tome  Ixv,  pp.  513-28.]  Paris,  1895 

GASPARRI,  P.  De  la  Valeur  des  Ordinations  Anglicanes.2 
pp.  91.  Paris,  1895 

1  Reprinted  from  Le  Canoniste  Contemporain. 
8  Reprinted,  with  corrections  and  additions,  in  the  Revue  Anglo- 
Romaine,  Vol.  I,  pp.  481-93,  and  529-57. 


400     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

REVUE  ANGLO-ROMAINE.  Tome  I,  pp.  812;  Tome  II, 
pp.  812  ;  Tome  III,  pp.  768.  Paris,  1895-6 

LEO  XIII.  Leonis  Papae  XIII  Epistola  Apostolica  ad 
Anglos.  [Revue  Anglo-Romaine,  Tome  I,  pp.  33-40.] 
Paris,  1895 

*  MARSHALL,  A.  F.     The  Moral  Aspects  of  the  Question 

of  Anglican  Orders.     [American  Catholic  Quarterly 
Review,  January,  1896.] 

ANONYMOUS.  Les  Ordinations  Anglicanes,  a  propos 
d'une  Brochure.1  [Revue  Anglo-Romaine,  Tome  I. 
PP-  S77-92-]  Paris,  1896 

Anglican    Orders.      [Church    Quarterly    Review, 

Vol.  41,  pp.  281-303  ;    Vol.  42,  pp.  24-5 1 .]     London, 
1896 

TOURNEBIZE,  S.J.,  F.  Le  Mouvement  vers  1'Union  en 
Angleterre.  [Etudes  Religieuses,  Tome  Ixvii,  pp. 
159-70.]  Paris,  1896 

RAGEY,  Le  Pere.  La  Crise  Religieuse  en  Angleterre. 
pp.  299.  Paris,  1896 

MAC  DEVITT,  J.  Are  Anglican  Orders  Valid  ?  pp.  xv-75- 
Dublin,  1896 

HALIFAX,  Viscount  Autorite  et  Juridiction.  [Revue 
Anglo-Romaine,  Tome  I,  pp.  337-9.]  Paris,  1896 

UCALEGON.  Autorite  et  Juridiction.  [Ibid.  pp.  339-47]. 
Paris,  1896 

BOUDINHON,  A.  Primaut6,  Schisme  et  Juridiction. 
[Ibid.  pp.  348-57.]  Paris,  1896 

PORTAL,  F.  La  Crise  Religieuse  en  Angleterre.  [Ibid, 
pp.  728-46.]  Paris,  1896 

PULLER,  S.S.J.E.,  F.  W.  Les  Ordinations  Anglicanes 
et  le  Sacrifice  de  la  Messe.2  pp.  57.  Paris  and  London, 
1896 

1  The  authorship  was  afterwards  acknowledged  by  Cardinal  Segna. 

2  Reprinted,  with  corrections  and  additions,  from  the  Revue  Anglo- 
Romaine. 


APPENDIX   IV  401 

LACEY,  T.  A.      L'imposition  des  mains  dans  la  Consecra- 
tion des  Eveques.1     pp.  20.     Paris,  1896 

La  Doctrine  de  Nicholas  Ridley  sur  1'Eucharistie. 

[Revue  Anglo-Romaine,  Vol.  I,  pp.  637-47.]     Paris, 

1896 

De   1'Unite   de   1'Eglise,  d'apres   les   Theologiens 

Anglicans.     [Ibid.,  Tome  II,  pp.  529-38.]     Paris,  1896 

Dissertations  Apologeticae  de  Hierarchia  Angli- 

cana  Supplementum.     pp.  48.     Rome,  1896 
—  De  Re  Anglicana.2     pp.  15.     Rome,  1896 


GASOUET  OSB    F  A    [RisPosta  all>  opuscolo  intitolato 

LrASQUET,  O.S.B,    i<.  A.    I  Re     A       U  ,,2      pp>     2;. 

MOYES'J-  I  Rome,  1896 

BAYFIELD  ROBERTS,  J.  B.    Primaute,  Schisme,  et  Juri- 

diction.     [Revue  Anglo-Romaine,  Tome  I,  pp.  769- 

78  ;  Tome  II,  pp.  3-13.]     Paris,  1896 

BOUDINHON,  A,  Les  Aspects  Moraux  de  la  Question  des 
Ordres  Anglicans.  [Ibid.,  Tome  II,  pp.  60-74.]  Paris, 

1896 

Primaute,  Schisme,  et  Juridiction.    [Ibid.,  pp.  97- 

107;  160-71.]     Paris,  1896 
Nouvelles  Observations  sur  la  Question  des  Ordres 

Anglicans.     [Ibid.,  pp.  625-32,  673-82,  770-91.] 

DENNY,  EDWARD.  L'Eglise  Anglicane  et  le  Ministere  des 
Eglises  de  la  Reforme.  [Ibid.,  pp.  481-90,  539-54.] 
Paris,  1896 

PORTAL,  F.  Une  Conference  a  Londres.  [Ibid.,  Tome 
III,  pp.  16-24.]  Paris,  1896 

*  KARENT,  S.  La  Forme  sacramentelle  dans  les  Ordina- 
tions Anglicanes.  [Etudes  Religieuses.]  Paris,  1896 

LEO  XIII.  S  Srni  Domini  nostri  Leonis  divina  Provi- 
dentia  Papae  XIII  Epistola  Encyclica  de  Unitate 
Ecclesiae.  [Revue  Anglo-Romaine,  Tome  III,  pp. 
641-66.]  Paris,  1896 

1  Reprinted,  with  corrections  and  additions,  from  the  Revue  Anglo- 
Romaine.  2  Printed  for  private  circulation. 

2   D 


402     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

LEO  XIII.  Sanctissimi  Domini  nostri  Leonis,  divina 
Providentia  Papae  XIII  Litterae  Apostolicae  de 
Ordinationibus  Anglicanis.  [With  an  English  trans- 
lation.] pp.  49.  London,  1896 

SMITH,  s.j.,  SYDNEY  F.  Companion  to  the  Encyclical 
"  Satis  cognitum."  pp.  iv-129.  London,  1896 

Le  Mouvement  de  Reunion  en  Angleterre.  [Etudes 

Religieuses,  Tome  Ixix,  pp.  5-33.]     Paris,  1896 

YORK,  Archbishop  of.  Sermon  preached  at  the  opening 
of  the  Church  Congress  at  Shrewsbury.  Official 
Report,  pp.  6-19.  London,  1896. 

VAUGHAN,  Cardinal.  Discours  prononce  a  la  conference 
annuelle  de  la  Catholic  Truth  Society,  tenue  a  Hanley 
le  28  Septembre.1  [Revue  Anglo-Romaine,  Tome  III, 
pp.  465-80.]  Paris,  1896 

BROWNE,  G.  F.  (Bishop  of  Stepney).  Anglican  Orders  ;  a 
Speech  delivered  at  the  Church  House,  on  Thursday, 
Oct.  1 5th,  1896.  pp.48.  London,  1896 

PULLER,  S.S.J.E.,  F.  W.  The  Bull  Apostolicae  Curae 
and  the  Edwardine  Ordinal,  pp.  64.  London,  1896 

BENSON,  ARTHUR  H.  T.  The  Pope's  Bull  on  Anglican 
Orders,  pp.  79.  Dublin,  1896 

BAMPTON,  S.J.,  REV.  Fr.  The  Papal  Bull  on  Anglican 
Orders,  pp.  12.  London,  1896 

COMMITTEE  OF  THE  CHURCH  HISTORICAL  SOCIETY.  On 

the   Encyclical   Satis   Cognitum.     pp.   23.      London, 

1896 
A  Treatise  on  the  Bull  Apostolicae  Curae.    pp.  67. 

London,  1896 
FRERE,   W.    H.      What   is   the   position  of  the  Roman 

Catholic  Body  in  England?     pp.  30.     London,  1896 

The  Marian  Reaction  in  its  Relation  to  the  English 

Clergy.    A  Study  of  the  Episcopal  Registers,   pp.  288. 
London,  1896 

1  I  have  not  been  able  to  obtain  an  English  edition  of  this. 


APPENDIX   IV  403 

OXEN  HAM,  F.  N.  Some  Considerations  suggested  by  the 
Letter  of  Leo  XIII  on  Anglican  Orders,  pp.  24. 
London,  1896 

STORY,  ROBERT  HERBERT.  The  Pope  and  Anglican 
Orders,  pp.  24.  Edinburgh,  1896 

SWETE,  HENRY  BARCLAY.  On  the  Bull  Apostolicae 
Curae,  pp.  27.  Cambridge,  1896 

STOKES,  GEORGE  T.  The  Pope  on  Anglican  Orders  ; 
two  introductory  Lectures  on  the  religious  relations 
between  Rome  and  England,  pp.  48.  Dublin,  1896 

HALL,  H.  E.  Anglican  Orders  and  the  Papal  Bull.  pp.  32. 
London,  1896 

STALEY,  VERNON.  Are  our  Clergy  rightly  Ordained? 
pp.  20.  London,  1896. 

TOURNEBIZE,   S.J.,    F.     Ordres   Anglicans   et   Ministeres 

des  Eglises   Reformees.     [Etudes  Religieuses,  Tome 

Ixix,  pp.  651-76.]     Paris,  1896 
LACEY,  T.  A.     The  Pope  and  the  Anglicans ;  (i)   The 

sources  of  the  Bull.  [Contemporary  Review,  December, 

pp.  793-803.]     London,  1896 

CATHOLICUS.  The  Pope  and  the  Anglicans ;  (ii)  The 
Policy  of  the  Bull.  [Ibid.,  pp.  804-9.]  London,  1896 

BARNES,  ARTHUR  STAPYLTON.     The   Popes  and  the 

Ordinal,     pp.  197.     London,  1896 
No  Sacrifice — No  Priest;  or,  Why  Anglican  Orders 

were  Condemned,     pp.  24.     London,  1897 
*  FEREY, Les  Ordinations  Anglicanes.     [Revue  du 

Monde  Catholique.]     1897 
COLLINS,  WILLIAM  EDWARD.    The  Internal  Evidence  of 

the  Letter  "  Apostolicae  Curae  "  as  to  its  own  Origin 

and  Value,     pp.  31.     London,  1897 
RADFORD,  DANIEL.     The  Providential  Character  of  the 

recent  Papal  Bull.     pp.  22.     London,  1897 
FULLER,  MORRIS.  The  Anglican  Ordinal,  pp.  79.  London, 

1897 


404     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

RESPONSIO  ARCHIEPISCOPORUM  ANGLIAE  AD  LITTERAS 
APOSTOLICAS  LEONIS  PAPAE  XIII  DE  ORDINA- 
TIONIBUS  ANGLICANIS.  pp.  43.  London,  1897 

ANSWER  OF  THE  ARCHBISHOPS  OF  ENGLAND  TO  THE 
APOSTOLIC  LETTER  OF  POPE  LEO  XIII  ON  ENGLISH 
ORDINATIONS,  pp.  48.  London,  1897 

'AHANTH2IS  TON  'APXIEniSKOHfiN  'AITAIA2 
HP02  TA  'AII02TOAIKA  TPAMMATA  IIAIIA 
AEONT02  TOY  IF  TA  IIEPI  TON  'AITAIKANI- 
KftN  XEIPOTONIfiN.  pp.  55.  London,i897. 

BRANDI,  s.J.,  SALVATORE  M.  La  Condanna  delle  Ordina- 
zioni  Anglicane.1  pp.  80.  Rome,  1897 

Roma  e  Canterbury.     Esame  della  Risposta  degli 

Arcivescovi  Anglicani  alia  Bolla  Apostolicae  Curae^ 
pp.  71.     Rome,  1897 

RlVINGTON,  LUKE.  Tekel :  or  The  Anglican  Arch- 
bishops arraigned  at  the  Bar  of  Logic,  and  Convicted 
of  75  Flaws,  pp.  47.  London,  1897 

ANONYMOUS.  An  Examination  of  the  Arguments  in  the 
Papal  Letter  on  Anglican  Orders ;  and  the  Pope's 
Criteria  applied  to  the  Roman  Ordinal,  pp.  17.  Phila- 
delphia, 1897 

LOWNDES,  ARTHUR.  Vindication  of  Anglican  Orders. 
Vol.  I,  pp.  xx-436;  Vol.  II,  pp.  6o2-cclxxxi.  New 
York,  1897 

RAGEY,  R.  P.  Le  Concile  Anglican  de  Lambeth.  [Le 
Correspondant,  25  juillet,  pp.  208-21  ;  10  aout, 
pp.  520-39.]  Paris,  1897 

VON  HACKELBERG-LANDAU.  Die  Anglicanischen  Weihen 
und  ihre  neueste  Apologie.2  Graz,  1897 

JEAFFRESON,  HERBERT  H.  A  Letter  on  the  Papal  Bull 
Apostolicae  Curae.  pp.  22.  London,  1897 

1  Reprinted,  with  additions,  from  the  Civilta  Cattolica, 

2  Reprinted    from    the  Literar.    Anzeiger  fur   das    Katholischc 
Oesterreich. 


APPENDIX    IV  405 

ROE,  HENRY.  The  Continuity  of  the  Church  of  England 
and  the  Papal  Encyclical  Apostolicae  Curae,  pp.  87. 
Quebec,  1897 

*  SOKOLOFF,  V.     lerarkhija  Anglikanskoi  Episkopaljnoi 

Tzerkvi.     pp.  362.     Moscow,  1897 

One  Chapter  from  an  Enquiry  into  the  Hierarchy 

of  the  Anglican  Episcopal  Church,    pp.  44.     London, 
1897 

SMITH,  J.  BAINBRIDGE.  Ordinals  Past  and  Present  and 
their  Witness  to  the  Validity  of  English  Orders, 
pp.  108.  London,  1898 

VINDICATION  OF  THE  BULL  "APOSTOLICAE  CURAE." 
By  the  Cardinal  Archbishop  and  Bishops  of  the 
Province  of  Westminster,  pp.  122.  London,  1898 

COMMITTEE  OF  THE    CHURCH   HISTORICAL  SOCIETY. 

Priesthood   in  the  English   Church :  a  study  of  the 

"  Vindication  of  the  Bull  Apostolicae  Curae"     pp.  70. 

London,  1898 
FIRMINGER,  WALTER  K.     The  Alterations  in  the  Ordinal 

of  1662:    Why  were  they  made?     pp.  64.     London, 

1898 
Some   Comments   on   "  The   Vindication   of  the 

Bull  Apostolicae  Curae.'n     pp.  22.     Calcutta,  1898 

*  SPOTTISWOODE,  GEORGE  A.     The  Holy  Orders  of  the 

Church  of  England.     London,  1898. 
SMITH,  s.j.,  SYDNEY   F.      Anglican   Criticisms  on    the 

"Vindication."     [The  Month,  No.  405,  pp.  227-37.] 

London,  1898 
LACEY,  T.  A.    The  Interpretation  of  the  English  Ordinal. 

pp.  27.     London,  1898 
Gregory    IX    and    Greek    Ordinations,     pp.    16. 

London,  1898 
The  Unity  of  the  Church,  as  treated  by  English 

Theologians,     pp.  160.     London,  1898 

1  Reprinted,  with  additions,   from  the  Indian  Church  Quarterly 
Review. 


406     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 

BULGAKOFF,  A.  The  Question  of  Anglican  Orders,  in 
respect  to  a  "  Vindication "  of  the  Papal  Decision. 
Translated  by  W.  J.  Birkbeck.  pp.  46.  London,  1899 

FlDELlS.  [Charles  Willes  Wilshere.]  Leo  XI 1 1  an  Paulus 
IV  ?  Auctore  Laico.  pp.  23.  London  and  Paris,  1900 

*  MOVES,  JAMES.  Aspects  of  Anglicanism ;  or,  Some 
comments  on  certain  events  in  the  'nineties,  pp.  viii — 
499.  London,  1906. 

FlRMINGER,  W.  K.  Some  Ancient  Ordination  Cere- 
monies. [Indian  Church  Review,  Oct.,  pp.  429-50.] 
Calcutta,  1901 

WORDSWORTH,  JOHN  (Bishop  of  Salisbury).  The 
Ministry  of  Grace,  pp.  xxiv. — 486.  London,  1901. 

'ANAPOYT202,  XPHSTOX  To  ™Pos  ™v  'AyyXiwv 
XeipoToviwv  e£  eTro^ew?  'Qp6o86£ov.1  pp.  96.  Con- 
stantinople, 1903. 

LAWLOR,  HUGH   JACKSON.     The   Reformation  and   the 

Irish  Episcopate,     pp.  59.     London,  1906 
SERLE,  S.  E.  B.     The  Validity  of  Anglican  Ordinations. 

pp.  16.     London,  1907. 
BRIGGS,  CHARLES  AUGUSTUS.    Church  Unity  ;  Studies  of 

its  most  important  problems,    pp.  xii — 459.    London, 

1910. 
SNEAD-Cox,  J.  G.     The  Life  of  Cardinal  Vaughan,  Vol.  I, 

pp.  X.-483  ;  Vol.  II,  pp.  498.     London,  1910 

1  A  very  inaccurate  English  translation  of  this  work  was  published 
in  the  year  1910. 


INDEX 


INDEX 


Abyssinian  Campaign,  Requiem  Mass 
attended  by  the  King  and  Members 
of  Legislature,  79  (note) 
Abyssinian  Ordinations  (1704),  127, 

130,  262,  299,  363,  392  (note) 
Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,  See  Forms 

of  Ordination 

Act  Book  of  the  Convent  of  Canter- 
bury, 39 
Agliardi,  Mgr.,  Papal  Nuncio  to  the 

Czar's  Coronation,  58 
Aldrich,  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  and  the 

English  Ordinal,  313,  322 
Alexander  III,  Decretal  of,  338 
Alexander,  Natalis,  on  the  Tradition 

of  the  Instruments,  264 
Alexander  VII,  likeness  to  Napoleon 

III,  36 
Alexandria,     Church    of,    Primitive 

customs  of,  7,  16,  64,  292  (note) 
Alva,  Duke  of,    Treaty  with  Eliza- 
beth,  77  (note) 

Amelli,  Dom,  Prior  of  Monte  Cas- 
sino — 

Letter  from,  132 
Visits  to,  23,  67,  68 
Anglican    Orders — 

Commission   on,    appointed    by 
Leo  XIII,  8,  9,  10,  n,  15- 
17,  21,  22,  23,  29,  31,  50,  51, 
54,  57  (note),  59,  60-2,  81,  87, 
145-46,  148-49,  254-62 
Difficulties  in  the  way  of,  8-17, 
21-3,48,  5°,  6l,  114,  299- 
300 

Members  of,  8,  31 
Order  of  Procedure,  54 
Condemnation   of,    in   the  Bull 
Apostolicae  Curae,  253-282 
By  the  Holy  Office,  256,  257 
Ground  of  the  Decision,266-72 
Inconsistency  of  the   Roman 

Position,  298-307 
Sources  of  the  Bull,  253-82 
Theology  of  the  Bull,  285-307 
confusion   introduced    into, 
301-7 


Anglican  Orders — 

Memorandum    on,    by   W.    E. 

Gladstone,  139 

Paul   IV,  Bull  of,  implicit  ac- 
ceptance of,  in,  171-6.  See  also 
Edwardine    Orders,     English 
Ordinal,  Forms  of  Ordination, 
Holy  Office.   Pole's  Mission  of 
Reconciliation,  and  Reunion 
Apostolicae  Curae,  the  Bull  of  Leo 
XIII— 

Sources  of  the  Bull,  253-82 
Theology  of  the  Bull,  285-307 
Aquinas,   St.  Thomas,  View  of  the 
essential  form  in  Ordination,  44, 
280,  205 

Greek  Baptism,  334,  337-8 
Archives.     See  Holy  Office 
Armenian     Church,    recognition    of 
Orders  by  Rome,  298,  299 

Decretum  ad  Armenos,  33,   95, 
296-7,  306,  334,  335  (note), 
357,  358,  360,  361 
Armenian  Mass  at  S.  Nicola  da  To- 

lentino,  description  of,  70,  74-6 
Arian  Baptism,  Validity  of,  44 
Arras,  Cardinal  Bishop  of,  Letter  of 

Bishop  Quadra  to,  122 
Association  for  Promoting  the  Unity 

of  Christendom,  204 
Auvray,  M.,  Registers  of  Gregory  IX, 
332,  333 

B 
Baptism,  Sacrament  of — 

Immutable  formula  for,  1 1 
Practice  of  the  Eastern  Churches, 
108,  289  (note),  331-35,  338 
(note) 
Unalterable   when    once  given, 

289,  290 

Barbaro,  Daniele  (Venetian  State 
Papers),  quotation  from,  (30,)  32, 
34,  178,  323,  324 

Barlow,  Bishop,  case  of,  21,  22,  30, 
34,  38,  39,  40,  41,  42,  46,  47,  5°, 
5i,  61,  97,  99,   101-16,  126,  153- 
68,  211,  313,  314 
Career  of,  313,  314 


409 


4io    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


Barlow,  Bishop — 

Dialoge  of,  Rev.  J.  R.  Lunn  on, 

3°.  39,  93.  94,  3*4  (note) 
Royal  Mandate,  39,  40,  61,  64, 
102,  104,  106,  107,  108,  126 
Letters  to  the  Tablet  on,  157-68 
Memorandum  delivered  to  Car- 
dinal Mazzella,  153-7 
Text  of,  108-10,  155,  156 
Vote  in  favour   of  the  English 

Ordinal,  313,  316  (note) 
Bari,    Archbishop    of,    and    Greek 
Ordinations,  331,  332,  333  (note), 
335,  336 

Barnes,  A.  S. ,  reference  to,  36,  47,  50 
Benedict  XIV,  De  Synodo  Diacesana, 
263,  264 

on  the  question  of  change  in  the 
essential  form  of  Orders,  296, 
297,  304 
Benedictines  of  San  Anselmo,  Mass 

at  36,  37 

Bibliography,  398 
Biblioteca  Casanatense,  34,  50 
Biblioteca  Nazionale,  books  of  refer- 
ence in,  34,  96 
Billuart,   on  the  Essential  Form  in 

Orders,  268,  279 
Birkbeck,  W.  J.,  reference  to,  29, 

57  (note) 

Bishops,  Consecration  by  imposition 
of  the  Gospel  Text,  7,  16,  292 
(note) 

Deprivation  of,  105 
Alleged  instances  of,  211,  212, 

242-5 
Edward   VI   and    later,   under, 

196,  211,  212,  242-5 
Power  of,  to  ordain,  limited  by 

their  catholicity,  12,  13 
Royal  Mandate  for  Consecration 

of.    See  Barlow  case 
Sarum   Pontifical  for  Consecra- 

of,  3*-3>  96 

See  also  Forms  of  Ordination  and 

the  Barlow  and  Gordon  cases. 

Bliss,    Mr.,  assistance  rendered   by, 

73  (note),  177 
Bonner,  Bishop — 

Deprivation  of,  212,  242 
Reordinations,  possible,  by,  57, 

.    58 

Bossierre,  M.  de,  reference  to,  35,  50 
Boudinhon,  Abbe — 

Comparison  of  the  English 
Ordinal  with  other  Forms  re- 
cognized by  Rome,  14-17, 
259,  293,  294,  299,  303  (note), 
304,  305 


Boudinhon,  Abbe — 

De  la  validit^  des  Ord.   Angl., 

by,  299  (note),  303  (note) 
De  Hierarchia,  review  of,  by,  5 
Gasparri,  Mgr., association  with, 

6,  14-17,  83,  259,  299 
Primautt,   Schisme   et  Juridic- 

tion,  by,  84  (note) 
Bouix,  Tractatus  de  Curia  Romana, 

130 

Bourret,  Cardinal,  Reference  to,  7 
Brandi,  S.  J.  Fr.,  S.  M. 

Civilta  Cattolica,  articles  in,  264 

(note),  272-5 

Condanna  delie  Ord.  Angl.,  258 
(note),  275  (note),  280  (note), 
294  (note) 

Documents  in  the  Gordon  De- 
cision, 272-5 
Roma  e    Canterbury,    by,    172, 

249,  312  (note) 
Briggs,  Dr.  C.  A.,  307  (note) 
Brechin,  Bishop  of,  reference  to,  68 
Bright,  Canon,  note  on  an  incident 

with,  35  (note),  96 
Brown,   R.,    Venetian  State  Papers, 

324  (note) 

Bruno,    Giordano,   political   demon- 
stration, 55 
Bucer,  Martin,  De  Ordinatione  Legi- 

tima,  123,  195,  317,  318 
Bulach,  Abbe  Zorn  de,  visit  from,  65 
Bulkeley,  Bishop,  consecration  of,  40 
Bullinger,  references  to,  314  (note), 

327  (note) 

Bulls,  Papal.     See  under  names  of 
Popes 


Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers 

.   .  .  preserved  in  the  Archives  of 

Simancas,  extracts  from,  116-23 

Canoniste  Contemporain,  Review  in,  5 

Canons  of  Hippolytus.     See  Hippo- 

lytus 

Canterbury,  Archbishop  of,  and  the 
question  of  licensed  leave  of  ab- 
sence, 92,  .93 

Act  Book  of  the  Convent  of,  39 
Convocation  of  (i  531),  146.     See 
also  Leo  XIII,  Reply  of  the 
English  Archbishops  to 
Canterbury  Register.     See  Cranmer 
Cardinals,  Commission  of.    See  Holy 

Office 

Carini,  Padre,  Pamphlet  by  (Monsgr. 
Nicolo  Ormaneto  .  .  .  Nunzio  .  .  . 
alia  Corte  di  Filippo  II),  77  (note) 


INDEX 


411 


Carne,  Sir  Edward,  Embassy  to 
Rome,  176 

Carthage,  Conference  of,  54 

Casetta,  Mgr.,  Patriarch  of  Antioch, 
reference  to,  69 

Cassino,  Monte,  visit  to  the  Monas- 
tery at,  23,  67,  68 

Catacomb  of  St.  Priscilla,  visit  to, 
34,  35,  96 

Cecil,  Wm. ,  References  to  (Simancas 
Papers),  116-18,  121,  124,  125 

Chabot,  M.,  visit  from,  36 

Chambers,  Bishop,  retains  his  See 
under  Edward  VI  and  Mary,  243, 
244 

Chandler,  Bishop,  Royal  Mandate  for 
Consecration  of,  159 

Church  Quarterly  Review  on  Essen- 
tials of  Ordination,  298 

Church  Year  Book,  statistics,  207-9, 
248 

Civilta  Cattolica,  Fr.  Brandi  on  the 
Gordon  Decision,  in,  264  (note), 
272,  273 

Claudio,  San,  Order  of  Mass  at,  38 

Clement  XI,  Decision  in  the  Gordon 
case,  259,  260 

Clifton,  Bishop  of,  reference  to,  103 

Coleridge,  Christabel,  reference  to,  1 45 

Chalcedon,  Council  of,  51 

Colosseum  by  moonlight,  72 

Commission  on  Anglican  Orders. 
See  Anglican  Orders 

Communion,  frequency  of,  in  Eng- 
lish Church,  222,  247,  248 

Communities,  Religious,  in  the  Eng- 
lish Church — 
Clerical,  207 
Lay,  208 

Comprehensiveness  of  the  English 
Church,  227 

Concilia,  The.  See  the  Simancas 
Correspondence,  116-25 

Conditional  Reordination.  See  Re- 
ordination. 

Contemporary  Review,  article  in, 
"The  Sources  of  the  Bull  Apos- 
tolicae  Curae,"  253-72,  274 

Councils  of  the  Church.  See  Chalce- 
don, Mainz,  and  Trent 

Convocation  of  Canterbury  (1531),  146 

Cowley,  Society  of  St.  John  the 
Evangelist  at,  201,  207,  225 

Cranmer,  Archbishop — 
Attainder  of,  105 
Consecration  of,  29 
English  Ordinal  and,  29,  40,  42, 

210,      211,     241-45,     312-20, 

321  (note),  324,  328  (note) 


Cranmer,  Archbishop — 

Register  of,   39,  41,    112,   113, 

161-3,  167,  168 

Sense  in  which  Paul   IV  con- 
demns, 42 

Crawford,  F.  Marion,  Characters  of, 

identified  in  Roman  Society,  66,  67 

Cromwell,  Letter  to  Tuke,  34,  96-7, 

127 

Crowe,  Mr.,  Correspondent  of  the 
Daily  Telegraph  and  Tablet,  in- 
quiry from,  55 

Crypt  of  St.  Peter,  Mass  in,  24 
Cyprian,     St.,     Controversy      with 
Stephen  of  Rome,  301  (note) 


Daniel,  Mgr. ,  meeting  with,  64 
D'Annibale,    on    the   Decretum    ad 

Armenos,  95 
Dasent,  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council, 

324  (note) 

Day,  Bishop,  deprivation  under  Mary, 
212,  243 

Vote  against  the  English  Ordi- 
nal, 313,  316  (note) 
De  Augustinis,  Fr. ,  interview  with,  60 
Member  of  the  Pope's  Commis- 
sion, 8,  31,  306 

Memorandum  on  Anglican  Or- 
ders, 6,  42-6,  54  (note),  95, 
99,  100,  115,  180  (note),  254, 
255.  259 

Abstract  of,  42-6 

De    Hierarchia   Anglicana,    by    E. 
Denny  and  T.  A.  Lacey,  5,  6,  39» 
64,  66,  69,  95  (note),  98,  99  (note), 
115,  123  (note),  172,  187,  262 
Supplement    to,    64-6,    83,    99 
(note),    123,    130,    161,    164 
(note),  171,177,  187 
Council  of  Mainz,  187 
De  Re  Anglicana,  by  T.  A.  Lacey, 
20,  67,  69,  72,  78,  83,  133,  195 
Adverse  criticism,  20,    21,  210- 

39,  240-9 
Printed   for    private    circulation 

only,  20,  133,  241 
Risposta  airOpuscolo,  by  J.  C. 
Moyes  and   F.    A.    Gasquet, 
210-39 

The  Risposta  Examined,  240-9 
Statistics  given,  69,  78,  207-9 
De  Lugo,  on  the  essential  forms  in 

Ordination,  52,  280,  281,  377 
Decretum  ad  Armenos  (Eugenius  IV), 
33,    95.    296-7,    306,    334,    335 
(note),  357,  35^,  360.  361 


412     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


Degradation     of    English    Bishops, 
alleged,    32  (note),   34,  95,   212, 
242,  243 
Delehaye,  Pere,  Bollandist,  meeting 

with,  72 

Denny,  Edward,  Anglican  Orders 
and  Jurisdiction,  by,  4,  99  (note), 
298  (note) 

Association  with  the  Author,  4,  5 

Letters  to  T.  A.  Lacey,  98,  126 

Denzinger,  Enchiridion,  reference  to, 

289  (note) 

d'Hulst,  Mgr.,  visit  to,  83 
Diary,  A  Roman,  29-84 

Author's  retrospect,  21-4 
Dillon,  Mr. ,  pressure  brought  to  bear 

on,  37 

Dissenters,  origin  of,  197 
Dissertatio  Apologetica  de  Hierarchia 
Anglicana,  publication  of.     See  De 
Hierarchia. 
Divine  Office,  The,  in  the  English 

Church,  224 
Dixon,   History,   references    to,    33, 

180  (note),  324  (note),  327  (note) 
Donatists,  method  of  argument,  54 
Duchesne,  Abbe,    general  references 
to,  6,  8,  19,  29,  30,  31,  33,  46,  47, 
48,  51,  54,  57,  59,  7i,  72,  81,  89, 
95,  96,  100,  113,  114,  115,   128, 
129,  130,  132,  134,  135,  254,  255, 
299,  300,  306 

Consultor  to  the  Pope's  Commis- 
sion, 8,  31,  89,  254 
Honorary    Doctorate    of   Cam- 
bridge offered  to,  71,  72,  129 
View  held  by,  as  to  the  action  of 
the  Commission,  48,  59,  299, 
300 

Dudley,  Lord  R.  (Simancas  Corre- 
spondence), references  to,  116,  117, 
121 

E 

Eastern.  Churches- 
Forms  of  Baptism,   289  (note), 
290  (note) 

Ordination,    differing    from 
Western    use,    100,    279, 
281,  295-7 
Intercourse   of  English  Church 

with,  203 

Ordinations       implicitly       con- 
demned by  Leo  XIII,  386 
Recognition  of,  by  Rome,  299- 

306 

Reunion  and,  203,  271 
Edward  VI,  Bishops  under,  196,  211, 
242-5,3.12-19 


Edwardine    Orders.      See     English 
Ordinal 

Priests  reconciled  by  unction,  65, 

125,  360  (note) 

Eirenicon,  an,  by  Dr.  Pusey,  204 
Elizabeth,     beginnings    of,    77,    78 
(notes),  124,  196,  212-18,246,247 
Council    of    Trent,    reply   con- 
cerning, 61,   121-2 
Question  of  the  Concilia,  121, 122 
Recusants  under,  78  (note),  196, 

216,  247 
Simancas  Correspondence,  116- 

25 

Ely,  Bishop  of,  reference  to,  20,  29 
Correspondence     with     T.     A. 

Lacey,  89,  92,  93,  132 
Embassy  to  Rome  (confirmation  of 
Pole's  General  Dispensation),  172 
(note),  176,  344 

Encyclicals,  Ad  Anglos,  6,  206,  341 
Satis  Cognitum,  63   (note),   83, 

84,  133,  !34 
English  Church,  part  of  the  Church 

Catholic,  12-14,  285-307 
English  Church  Union,  9,  37,  247 
English  College,  Library  of,  38 
English  Ordinal,  general  references, 
42-6,  58,  62,  87,  95,  105,  107,  123 
(note),    124,    125,    171,    177,    280 
(note),  311-28,  386 

Marian  Reaction  and,   62,    99, 
105,  113,  196,  212,  242-3,  322 
Cardinal  Pole's   description    of, 
123  (note),  177,  280  (note) 
Text  of,  181-4 

Interpretation  of,  311-28,  350 
Ordinal  changes  in  1662,  375 
Paul  IV  and  Julius  III  and,  171. 
See  also  Barlow  and   Gordon 
cases,  and  De  Augustinis,  Fr. , 
on 

Preface  to,  378 
Words  Bishop   and    Priest    in, 

311,  312,  328,  350,  375 
Estcourt,  and  the  Barlow  Documents, 
3r>  3/4,  36,  96,  97,  127,  324  (note) 
Eugenius  IV,  Decretum  ad  Armenos, 
33,  95,  296,  297,  306,  307,  334, 
335  (note),  357,  358,  360,  361,  387 
Pole's  Legatine  Constitution,  94 
Excommunication,    discussion   as  to 
the  nature  of,  32 


Fabre,  M.  Paul,  on  De  Hierarchia,  17 
references  to,  38,  39,  49,  51,  71, 

72,  79,  81 
Farnese  Palace,  visit  to,  30 


INDEX 


Feria  Quinta,  Session  of  the  Holy 

Office  on,  131,  266,  270 
Ferrar,  Bishop,   case  of,  31,  32,  33, 
95,  96,  3H,  32i  (note) 

alleged  degradation  of,  32  (note) 
Fete  Dieu  and  Public  Procession  of 

the  Blessed  Sacrament,  79 
Fleming,  Fr.  David,  8,  31,  88,  100 
Member  of  the  Pope's  Commis- 
sion, 8,  31 

Formosus,  reference  to,  357 
Forms   of  Ordination  (discussion  of 
essentials  in),  10-17,  41,  42-6,  48, 
52,  54,  63,  93,  97,  98,  100,  101, 
115,    128,    192   (note),   255,   258, 
2S9,  263,  264,  267,  268,  274,  276, 
278-82,  288-307,  317,  335-8 
Accipe  Sfiritum    Sanctum,  the 
form,  43,  44,  54,  97,  98,  100, 
128,  192  (note),  268,  278-82, 
317,  349,  357,  373 
Eastern  and  Western,  differences 

in,  279,  281,  295-7,  331-8 
Imposition  of  the  Gospel  Text, 

7,  16,  292  (note) 
Mainz,   Council  of,   on,  43,  54, 

83,  187-92 

Ordones  Romani,  370,371  (notes) 
Other  Ancient  Forms,  370 
Roman  Rites,  Ancient,  369 

Modern,  10,  369,  381 
Unalterable   nature   of  a  valid, 

289-91 
See  also  Intention  and  Tradition 

of  the  Instruments 
Fournier,     Professor,    reference    to, 

39,  49,  Si 
Fox,    Bishop,    Writ   of    Restitution, 

160 

Foxe,  reference  to,  32  (note) 
Frere,  Rev.  W.  H. ,  correspondence 
with  T.   A.   Lacey  (Barlow  docu- 
ments), 101,  104,  112,  116,  135 
on   the    Marian    Reaction,    62, 

105,  322 

Reordinations  by  Bonner,  57,  58 
Gairdner,    Catalogue,    reference    to, 
1 6 1 .     Letters  and  Papers  of  Henry 
VIII,  34,  36,  96,  97,  130 
Galimberti,   Cardinal,  references  to, 
55,  58,  60,  62 
Death  of,  62 
Gardiner,    Bishop,     deprivation    of, 

212,  242 
Gasquet,  Dom — 

Discovery  of  the  Bull  and  Brief 

of  Paul  IV,  6,  171,  176 
Edward    VI  and  the    Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  by,  245 


Gasquet,  Dom — 

Member    of   the    Pope's    Com- 
mission, 8,  31 
Minor  references,  30,  88 
O'Harte  MS.  98  (note),  99 
Risposta   AlFOpuscolo    (De    Re 
Anglicand),    by,    and    J.    C. 
Moyes,  210-39 

Gasparri,  Mgr,  general  references, 
5-8,  10, 14-17,  29,  30-3,  35,  38-42, 
46,  47,  5°,  Si,  52,  54,  58,  83,  87, 
88,  95,  102,  114,  115,  133,  254, 
259,  273,  299,  303  (note),  304 
Boudinhon,  Abbe,  association 

with,  6,  14-17,  83,  259,  299 
Consultor   to   the   Pope's   Com- 
mission, 8,  29,  31,  89 
De  la    Valeur  des    Ord.  Angl. 
ty,     175    (note),     273,     299, 
303  (note),  304 
Tractatus  de  Sacra  Ordinationc, 

46,  297  (note) 

Genetti,  Consultor  to  the  Holy  Office, 
261 

Report    on    the    Gordon    case, 

48,  261 

German  College,  Mass  at,  33 
Gibson,  Mandate  for  consecration  in, 

in 
Gladstone,  Rt.  Hon.  W.  E.,  49 

Correspondence     with     T.     A. 

Lacey,   132,   134 
Memorandum  by,  on  the  validity 
of  Anglican  Orders,  139,  236, 

237 

Minor  references  to,  18,  22,  23, 
52,  53,  71,  72,  76,  77,  78,  80, 

81,  82,  84,  236 

Message  from  Leo  XIII  to,  81, 

82,  134 

Times,   the,    on  the   Memoran- 
dum, 237 

Goodrich,  Bishop,  retains  his  See 
under  Edward  VI  and  Mary,  211, 
242,  243,  314 

Vote    on   the   English   Ordinal, 

313,  316  (note),  321  (note) 
Gordon  case,  the,  42,  48,  100,  107, 
108,  128,  129,  130,  135,  136,  259- 
71,   272-82,  346,  347,    362,  374, 
388 

Text  of  the  Decision,  273 
Inaccurate  form  of,  107 
Great  Schism  (1416),  159 
Greek   Baptism,    Gregory    IX   and, 
331-3,  335,  338  (note) 

Ordinations  accepted  by  Rome, 
48,  100,  101,  264,  331,  337 
Gregory  IX  and,  331-8,  387 


4M  A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


Gregory  IX  and  the  Greek  Ordina- 
tions, 264,  331-8,  387 

Text  of  Decretal,  332-3 
Gregory  X,   Greek  Church  received 

into  communion  by,  337 
Greig,  Rev.  David,  reference  to,  80 
Grey,  Lady  Jane,  Proclamation  of,  179 
Guardian,   The,   Articles  by  T.    A. 
Lacey  in, 

on   Cardinal   Pole's  Description 

of  the  English  Ordinal,  177 
on  the  Gordon  Decision,  272 
Letters  of  Fr.  Ryder,  on  the 

Gordon  Case,  264  (note) 
Guthlin,  Mgr.  (Lucius  Lector),  refer- 
ence to,  78 

H 

Halifax,  Lord,   correspondence  with 
T.  A.  Lacey,  88,  92 

Minor   references,    9,     29,    47, 
52,  57,  71,  84,   87,  89,  103, 
141,  203 
Hardouin,      Eastern    and     Western 

Orders,  281 

Heath, Bishop, deprivation  of,  212,242 
Imprisonment  of,  325,  326 
Vote  on  the  English  Ordinal,  313, 

315>  3i6,  3'9.  32o,  324,  325 
Henry  VIII— 

Royal    Mandate    for     Barlow's 
Consecration.        See    Barlow 
Case. 
Separation  from  Rome,  195,  210, 

241 
Hemptinne,    Dom    Hildebrand    de, 

interview  with,  37 
Hippolytus,  Canons  of — 

Form  for  ordination  of  Deacons, 

1 6,  293,  294,  369,  370  (notes) 

Primitive   arrangements   of   the 

Roman  Church,  64 
Hodgekyn,  Bishop,  Consecration  of 

Parker  by,  valid,  42 
Hohenlohe,  Cardinal,  visit  to,  51, 103 
Holbeach,  Bishop,  reference  to,  211, 

242,  316  (note),  321  (note) 
Holy  Cross   Day  at  Sta.  Croce    in 

Gerusalemme,  56,  57 
Holy  Office- 
Archives   of,   inaccessible,    129, 

135,  262 

Commission    of    Cardinals    on 
Anglican  Orders,  59,  63,  80, 
81,  114,  115,  127,  249,  256-63 
Risposta  and,  210-39,  240-9 
Procedure  of,  129,  130,  131 
—  Feria  Quinta,  131,  266,  270 


Hooper,  Bishop,  alleged  degradation 
of,  32  (note) 

Original  Letters,  314 
On  the  Prayer  Book,   327,  328 
(notes) 

I 

Ignazio,  St.,  visit  to,  35,  36 
Armenian  Mass  at,  36 
Imposition  of  Gospel  Text,  Ordina- 
tion by,  7,  16,  292  (note) 
Infallibility,   Question  of,   131,  266- 
72,  307  (note),  331 

Decisions  on  Feria  Quinta,  131, 

266-70 
Innocent  III,  Decretal,  de  Presbytero 

non  baptizato,  289  (note) 
Innocent  IV,  on  Forms  of  Ordina- 
tion, II 

Intention,   Doctrine  of,  44,  45,  60, 
98,  103,  104,  128,  141,  258,  326-8, 

351 
Interpretation  of  the  English  Ordinal, 

3J  ii  35° 

Italian  Government  and  Papal  Court, 
relations  between,  79,  80 

I 

Janssens,  Dom,  Prior  of  St.  Anselmo, 

53 

fulius  II,  reference  to,  65  (note) 
'fulius  III  and  Paul  IV,  41,  171-84, 

343.  359 

Commission  to  Pole,  73, 176,  343 
Implicit  recognition  of  English 
Orders,  46,  181 

K 

Keble,  Rev.   J.,   references  to,  199, 
204  (note) 

An  Eirenicon,  addressed  to  (by 

Dr.  Pusey),  204 

King,  Bishop,  retains  his  See  under 
Edward  VI  and  Mary,  243 

Reordinations  by,  322,  326 
Kitchin,    Bishop,    retains     his    See 
under  Edward  VI  and  Mary,  243, 
244 

Klein,  Abbe,    article   in   the   Revue 
Anglo- Romaine,  131 

Visit  from,  84 
Knox  Little,  Canon,  reference  to,  29 


Labbe,  reference  to,  166,  360  (note) 
Lacey,   Bishop.    Royal  Mandate  for 
Consecration  of,  159 


INDEX 


Lacey,  Rev.  T.  A.— 

A  Roman  Diary,  29-84 

Correspondence,  89,99,  IOI>  IO3, 
112,  114,  129,  132,  135 

See  also  articles  and  letters  in  the 
Contemporary  Review,  Guar- 
dian, and  Tablet 

De  Re  Anglicana  and  its  critics, 

195 
Gregory    IX     and     the     Greek 

Ordinations,  331 
Interpretation    of    the    English 

Ordinal,  311 

Introduction  to  the  book,  3 
The  Royal  Mandate  for  Barlow's 

Consecration,  153 
Sources  and  theology  of  the  Bull 
Apostolicae  Curae,  253,272,285 
Suppression  of  the  article  "  De 

Unitate  "  by,  63 

Visit  to  Rome  with  Fr.  Puller, 
on  account  of  the  Pope's  Com- 
mission, 8,  29 

Difficulties  of  the  work,  4, 

8-10,  14-20 

See  also  De  Hierarchia 
Lapotre,  S.J.,  Pere,  references  to,  32, 

71,  96 

Lateran,  Mass  at,  69,  70 
Museum,  visit  to,  73 
Lathbury,  D.  C.,   Correspondence  on 
Church  and  Religion  of  William 
Ewart  Gladstone,  134 
Launoy's  Definitions  of  the  Church,  50 
Lawrence,  Bampton  Lectures,quoted, 

123  (note) 
Lazarists'  House  at   Paris,   visit  to, 

82,83 
Le  Courayer  (Gordon  case),  reference 

to,  261 

Le  Plat,  reference  to,  98 
LeQuien,referenceto,i35,26i,363(n.) 
Lee  (Gordon  case),  reference  to,  107 
Lee,  Bishop,  Writ  of  Restitution,  160 
Letters,  A  Series  of,  87-136 

See,  under  proper  names:  Amelli, 
Denny,  Bishop  of  Ely,  Frere, 
Gladstone,  Halifax,  Lacey, 
Lunn,  Phillimore,  Portal, 
Ross-Lewin,  Wood 
Leve,  M.,  printer  of  the  Monde  and 

Revue,  visit  to,  82 
Leo  IV  and  the  Mouvement  Central- 

isateur,  49 
Leo  XIII— 

The  Bull  Apostolicae  Curae,  135, 
136,  172  (note),  253,  285,  311 
Sources  of,  253-82 
Theology  of  285-307 


Leo  XIII— 

Bull    of    Paul     IV,    inaccurate 
quotation  of,  by,   172  (note), 
345,  359 
Commission  on  Anglican  Orders, 

See  Anglican  Orders 
Eastern   Orders  implicitly  con- 
demned by,  386 
Encyclicals  :  Ad  Anglos,  6,  206, 
341 

Satis  cognitum,   63    (note), 

83,  84,  133,  134 
Letter  to  Cardinal  Richard,  249 
Letter    to    the    English    Arch- 
bishops, 395 
Message  to  Mr.  Gladstone,  8l, 

82,  134 

Personal  Attitude  of,  4,  6, 18-20, 
47,  49,  60,  77,  96,  101,  254- 
7,  265,  266 
Personal  Piety  of,  24 
Reply  of  the  English  Archbishops 

to,  354 

Unicitas  and  Unites,  on  the  dif- 
ference between,  84,  133.    See 
also  Infallibility. 
Lincoln,  trial  of  the  Bishop  of,  37, 

202,  229,  230 
Lingard,    treatment    of  the   Barlow 

case,  21,  165 
Lingens,    Fr.    Emil,    review    of  De 

Hierarchia  by,  5 

Llevaneras,  Fr.  Jose  Calasanzio, 
Member  of  the  Pope's  Commission, 
(note)  31 

Loisy,  M.,  Essays  of,  reference  to,  7 
Loth,  M.  Arthur,  editor  of  La  Verite, 

visit  to,  83 

Lunn,  Rev.  J.  R.,  Introduction  to 
Bishop  Barlow's  Dialoge,  30,  314 
(note) 

Letter  to  T.  A.  Lacey,  93 
Notes  on  Barlow's  Opinion  on 
Episcopal    Consecration,    39, 

47,93 
Lyon,  ceremonial  usages,  49,  50 

M 

Macaulay,  on  Apostolic  Succession ,  1 3 
MacDevitt,  Dr.,  on  Conditional  Re- 
ordination,  40 

Mainz,  Council  of  ( 1 549)>43, 53,83, 187 
Text  of— 

De  Sacramento  Ordinis,  187 
De  Forma  Sacramenti  Ordinis, 

188 

De   Materia    Sacramenti  Or- 
dinis, 1 88 
De  Presbyteris,  192 


416     A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


Manning,  Cardinal,  reference  to  Life 

of,  78  (note),  83  (note),  134 
Marcellinus,    Pope,  history   of,    Dr. 

Bright  on,  35  (note) 
Marculfus,     Indiculus    of    Prankish 

Kings,  166 
Marian  Reaction,  the,  62 ,  99,  105, 

113,  196,  212,  242-3,  322 
Marini,     Mgr.     (Substitute    of    the 
Rota),  the  Reunion  of  the  Eastern 
Churches,  82 

Martinengo,  Abbe,  117,  120 
Mary,    Queen,    Beginnings    of,    180 
(note) 

Bishops  under,  125,212,  242,243 

Reaction    under,    62,    99,    105, 

113,  196,  212,  242,   243,  322 

Refusal     to     admit     the    Papal 

Nuncio,  121 
Maskell,    quoted    for    the    order    of 

Episcopal  Consecration,  31,  96 
Mazzella,    Cardinal,    general    refer- 
ences, 22,  54,  55,  59,  60,  63,  95, 
96,  129,  135,  262 
Interview  with,  65 
Presentation  of   Report  to    the 

Pope,  76,  77 

President   of  the   Pope's    Com- 
mission, 31,  54,  95,  96 
Refusal  to  go  behind  the  Gordon 

Decision,  135,  262 
See  also  De  Hierarchies  Supple- 
mentum  and  the  Royal  Man- 
date 
Mercer,  Dom  Cuthbert,  reference  to, 

37 

Merry  del  Val,  Cardinal  (now  Cardi- 
nal Secretary  of  State),  34 
Micronius,  Martin,  criticism  of  Rid- 
ley by,  314  (note) 
Missionary  Societies  in  the  English 

Church,  209 

Monophysites.  See  Eastern  Churches 
Montagu,   Lord,  embassy  to  Rome, 

176 

Monte  Cassino,   Prior  of,   letter  to 
T.  A.  Lacey,  132 

Visit  to,  23,  66,  67 
Month,  The,  article  on  the  English 
Ordinal,     by    the    Rev.     Sydney 
Smith,  312,  322  (note) 
Montorio,  St.  Pietro  in,  visit  to,  32 
Morinus,   on   the   essential    form   of 

Orders,  280,  298 
Moyes,  Canon  J.  C. — 

on  the  Barlow  Documents,  38, 
39,  40,  41,  50,  51,  61,  94,  95, 
101-3,  112,  113,  114,  157, 
280  (note) 


Moyes,  Canon  J.  C. — 

Member  of  the  Pope's  Commis- 
mission,  8,  31 

Minor  references,  42,  46,  88,  135 

and  Gasquet,  F.  A. — 

Risposta  AW Opuscolo,  by,  210 
Reply  to,  by  T.  A.  Lacey,  240 

N 

Nag's  Head  Fable,  the,  40,  42,  261, 

274 

Neri,  Feast  of  St.  Philip,  72 
Nestorian     Orders,     recognized     by 

Rome,  299 

Newman,  Dr.  (afterwards  Cardinal), 
references  to,  22,  205,  206,  214 
Letter    to,    by    Dr.     Pusey,    Is 
Healthful  Reunion  Impossible? 
206  (note) 

Nicholas    I,    Responsa  ad  Consulta 
Bulgarorum ,  290  (note) 

Mouvement  Central! sateur,  and, 

49 

Baptism     "  in     the     Name    of 

Christ "  recognized  by,  1 1 
Nunziatura  in  Jnghilterra,  reference 
to,  177 

O 

O'Harte,  Bishop,  speech  in  the  Coun- 
cil of  Trent,  98 
Orders,  Holy,  sacramental  character 

of,  288,  289 

Unalterable  nature  of,  289,  290 

See  also  Anglican  Orders 
Ordinal,  The.     See  English  Ordinal 
Ordination.     See  Bishops  and  Forms 

of  Ordination,  and  Reordination 
Ormaneto,     Mgr.      Niccolo,     Papal 

Nunzio  to  Court  of  Spain  (1572- 

77),  77  (note) 
Oughton,  Formularies,  reference  to, 

III 

Oxenham,  Mr. ,  reference  to,  33, 36,62 
Oxford    Movement,    the,    198,    199, 

220,  221,  225 


Paleotti,   Acts  of  Council  of  Trent, 

reference  to,  98,  99 
Pantheon,  visit  to,  33 
Parker,  Archbishop,  validity  of  the 

Consecration  of,  42,  141,  276 
Parma,  Duchess  of,  letter  of  Bishop 

Quadra  to,  122 
Parocchi,  Cardinal  (Cardinal  Vicar), 

celebration  of  the  Mass  on  Holy 

Cross  Day,  56,  57 

Interviews  with,  69,  73,  77 


INDEX 


Parson,  Reasons  why  Catholiques  Re- 
fuse to  goe  to  Church,  247 

Patrizzi,  Cardinal  (Abyssinian  De- 
crees), reference  to,  128 

Paul   IV  (and  Julius   III),   171-84, 

343,  345,  359,  362 

Breve   Regimini,    31,    32,    171, 

362 
Bull    Praeclara    carissimi,    99, 

176-7,  359 

Inaccurately   quoted    by   Leo 
XIII,    172-3   (notes),   345, 

359 
Implicit  recognition  of  Anglican 

Orders  in,  41,  42,  171-6 
Nuncio  of,  refused  by  Mary,  12 1 
Pastoral  Office,  duties  of,  383 

Expressed  in   English  Ordinal, 

386 

in  Eastern  Formularies,  386 
Pastoral  work  of  the  English  Church, 
209 

Alms  of  the  Faithful,  209 
Pecci,  Cardinal,  statement  concern- 
ing, 55 
Peckham  s    constitution    concerning 

tabernacles,  reference  to,  94 
Penning,    Henry,    letter    sent    from 
Cardinal    Pole   to    Mary   by,    180 
(note) 
Peter  Martyr,  references  to,  195,  327 

(note) 

Peterborough,  Bishop  of,  as  repre- 
sentative of  the  English  Church  at 
Czar's  Coronation,  58,  79 

Lecture    on   Queen    Elizabeth, 

61,  123 
Phillimore,  Sir  Walter— 

on  the  Barlow  Documents,  III, 

164  (note) 
Interview  with  Cardinal  Ram- 

polla,  36,  37 
Visit  from,  32 

Pius  IV,  Bull  of  the  Concilia,  116-25 
Pius  V,  St. ,  Bull  Regnans  in  excelsis, 

77-8,  197,  216,  246,  247 
Pius  X  and  the  Bull  Apostolicae  Curae, 

reference  to,  307  (note) 
Pilkington,      Exposition     upon    the 
Prophet  Aggeus,  65,  126,  360  (note) 
Pocock,  Nicholas,  Reference  to,  214, 

324  (note) 

Pole,  Cardinal,  Acceptance  of  the 
English  Ordinal,  29,  31,  33,  35, 
46,  47,  62,  94,  95,  105,  113,  124, 
171-84 

Powers  granted  by  Julius   III, 
176,  177,  343 
by  Paul  IV,  171-7,  343 


Pole,  Cardinal — 

Description  of  the  English  Ordi- 
nal, 72,  73,  83,  177 

Date  the  Document  reached 

Rome,  73,   178-81 
Form  of  the  English  Ordinal,  181 
Practice  in  regard  to  the  English 

Ordinal,  359 

Pope's  Mass  (Leo  XIII),  Fr.  Puller 

and  T.  A.  Laceypresent  at, 24,81, 84 

Porter,  Fr.  (Archbishop  of  Bombay), 

Reference  to,  80 
Porrection  of  the  Instruments.      See 

Tradition  of  Instruments 
Portal,  Abbe,  general  references,  3, 
7,  23,  24,  29,  30,  38,  39,  41,  47, 
49,  52,  55,  57,  58,  59,  63,  66,  69, 
70,  72,  73,  77,  81,  82,  83,  87,  90, 
99,  103,  114,  115,  129,  254,  255 
Discussion  of  Anglican  Orders,  3 
Letter  to  T.  A.  Lacey,  87 
Memorandum  of  Mr.  Gladstone, 

49,  52,  72 

Revue  Anglo- Romaint   and,   7, 

22,  63  (note),  73 
Interest    in    the    Pope's    Com- 
mission,   10,  22,  23,  29,  41, 
59,  70,  81,  87,  90,  "4,  129, 
254,  255 
Prayers,  in  Rite  of  Ordination.     See 

Forms  of  Ordination 
Protestant  View  of  the  English  Ordi- 
nal, 311,  312 

Puller,    Fr.,    Article  in   the   Revue 
Anglo- Romaine,  7 

Interview   with    Cardinal   Van- 

nutelli,  66,  80 

Les  Ordinations  A  ng?uanes,by,S& 
Letters  to  T.  A.  Lacey,  91 
Minor  references  to,  30,  35,  36, 

50,  52,  54,  55,  57,  59,  65,  66, 
71,  81,  82,  112,  123,  127 

Share  in  De  Re  Anglicana,  240, 

241 

Visit   to    Rome  in  conjunction 
with  the  Rev.  T.  A.  Lacey, 
8-10,  18-20,  23,  29,  88,  89, 
90,  91,  254 
Puritans,  Origin  of,  197 
Pusey,  Dr.,  References  to,  199,  204, 
205,  206,  208,  233 

An  Eirenicon,  by,  204,  205 
Is  Healthful  Reunion  Impossible, 
by,  206  (note) 

Q 

Quadra,  Bishop,  The  Simancas  Cor- 
respondence, 116-23 
Note  on,  123 


4i 8    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


R 

Rampolla,  Cardinal  (Cardinal  Secre- 
tary of  State),  Interviews  with,  81 
Fr.  Puller  and  the  Rev.  T.  A. 
Lacey  requested  to  remain  in 
Rome   by,    19,   62,    63,    114, 
"5,  127 

Memorandum   from   Mr.   Glad- 
stone, question  of,  53,  60,  71, 
72 
Minor  references,  35,  49,  59,  84, 

127,  128,  134,  255,  272 
Receive  tjie  Holy  Ghost.     See  Forms 

of  Ordination 

Reconciliation.     See  Pole,  Cardinal, 
Mission    of,    Reordinations,    and 
Unction 
Recusants  under  Elizabeth,  196,  216, 

246,  247 
Religious  Congregations  in  England, 

201,  207,  208,  225 

Repps,  Bishop,  Royal  Assent  to  the 
Election  of,  62,  104,  126,  163,  168 
Reordination,  question  of  (1550-3), 
57,  58,  116,  125,  126,  326 

Conditional      in      the      Roman 
Church,  48,  49,  101,  131,  139, 
140,  255,  263,  264,  301 
Reunion,  Anglican  Orders,  recogni- 
tion of,  by  Rome  an  absolute  neces- 
sity for,  19,  20,  49,  60,  65,   131, 
139-45.  254,  271,  285-307 

Effect  of  the  Bull  Apostolicae 
Curae  on  the  Question  of,  253- 
72,  285-307 

Growing  desire  for,  4,  18,  19,  37, 

47,  55,  60,  65,  73,  77,  78,  Si, 

82,    83,    92,    101,    132,    139, 

204-6,  232-9,  256,  269,  271 

Mr.  Gladstone's  Memorandum, 

139 

Movement  in  the  English 
Church,  The  Risposta  on, 
232-9 

Revue   Anglo- Romaine,  issue  of,  by 
M.  Portal,  7,  22 

References  to,  22,  63,  73,  82,  84, 

204  (note),  258  (note) 
Suppression    of   the   article   De 

Unitate,  63  (note) 
Richard,    Cardinal,    Letter   of  Leo 

XIII  to,  249 

Ridley,  Bishop,  Degradation  of,  32 
(note) 

Minor  references,  211,  242 
Vote   on   the   English   Ordinal, 
313,   316   (note),    321    (note), 
327  (note) 
Riley,  Mr.  Athelstan,  reference  to,  29 


Risposta  all'  Opusculo  (De  Re  Angli- 
cana),  by  J.  C.  Moyes  and  F.  A. 
Gasquet,  210-39 

Reply  to,  by  T.  A.  Lacey,  240-9 
Ritual  Controversies,   Statements  in 
the  Risposta  concerning,  202,  223, 
233,  247-8 

Riviere,  s.j.,  Pere,  Meeting  with,  72 
Rochester,   Bishop  of,   Reference  to 

Speech  of,  288 
Rogation  Days,    not   observed   with 

abstinence  in  Roman  Church,  49 
Roman  Church,  Invariability  of,  32 
(note) 

Mystic  Life  of,  24-6 
Roman     Commission     on    Anglican 

Orders.     See  Anglican  Orders 
Roman  Diary,  A,  29-84 

Author's  Retrospect,  21-4 
Roman  Rites  of  Ordination,  Ancient, 
369 

Modern,  10,  369,  381 
Royal  Mandate  for  Consecration  of  a 
Bishop,  The,  153 

Memorandum  by  T.  A.   Lacey, 

153-7 
Letters  to  the  Tablet  by  T.   A. 

Lacey,  157-68 

Priorto  1533, instances  of,  159, 166 
Ross-Lewin,  Rev.  Canon,  Letter  to 

T.  A.  Lacey,  65,  125 
Rudini,   Marchese  di,  Speech  in  the 

Italian  Chamber,  79 
Ryder,  Fr. ,   Correspondence   in   the 
Guardian  on  Conditional  Reordin- 
ation, 264  (note) 


Sacconi,  Confraternity  of,  50 
S.  Agnese  fuori  le  Mure,  visit  to,  69 
S.  Asaph's.     See  Barlow  case 
S.   Clemente,   Dominican    Mass   at, 
70,71 

Miracle  connected  with,  71  (note) 
S.  David's.     See  Barlow  case 
S.  Jerome,  Tradition  of  the  Church 

of  Alexandria,  64 

S.  Thomas  Aquinas,  View  of  the 
essential  form  in  Ordination,  44, 
280,  295 

Greek    Baptisms    and    Ordina- 
tions, 334,  337-8 
Salcot,  Bishop,  Retains  his  See  under 

Edward  VI  and  Mary,  243 
Sampson,  Bishop,  Documents  for  the 
Consecration  of,  62,  112,  126,  163 
Retains  his  See  under   Edward 
VI  and  Mary,  243,  244,  315 
Vote  on  the  English  Ordinal,  313 


INDEX 


419 


Sarum  Pontifical,  Ordinal  of,  96 
Scannell,  Rev.   J.   B.,   on  Anglican 
Orders,  38,  70,  135,  256 

Member  of  the  Pope's  Commis- 
sion, 31 

Minor  references,  70,  94,  96,  99 
Scory,  Bishop,  Rehabilitation  of,  by 

Bonner,  58 

Segna,  Cardinal,  Friendliness  of,  80, 
272 

Interview  with,  65,  80,  272 
Minor  reference,  63,  8 1 
Shaxton,  Bishop,  references  to,  211, 
242 
Writ    of  promotion    to  Sarum, 

162,  167 

Sibley,  Dom  Dunstan,  reference  to,  68 

Sights    of    Rome    (Churches,    etc.), 

comments  on,  32,  33,  34,  35,  36, 

37,  38,  39,  47,  48,  5°,  53,  56>  59, 
62,  66,  67,  69,  70-2,  73,  74,  78,  81 
Sidney,  Sir  Henry  (Simancas  Corre- 
spondence), references  to,  116,  121 
Simancas    Correspondence,   extracts 
from,  116-23 

Note  on,  123-5 
Sinclair,  Archdeacon,  quoted  in  Ris- 

posta,  227,  247 
Sixtus  V,  reference  to,  77 
Skyp,  Bishop,  Royal  mandate  for  the 
consecration  of,  40 

Vote  on  theEnglish Ordinal,  313, 

316  (note) 
Smith,  Fr.  Sydney — 

Article  on  the  English  Ordinal 
(Month),  312,  313,  317,  321, 
322,  324 

Pamphlet  by,  39,  157,  161 
Tablet,  reference  to  article  in,  by, 

123  (note) 

Smythies,  Bishop,  friendly  relations 
with  the  Roman  Bishop  at  Zanzi- 
bar, 63 
Sneyd    Cox,    J.    G.,    biography    of 

Cardinal  Vaughan,  6,  8 
Society  of  S.   John  the  Evangelist, 

Cowley,  201,  207,  225 
Sorbonne,  the,  view  of  the  essential 

Form  in  Ordination,  280 
Statistics    of    the    English    Church, 
statements  in  the  Risposta  concern- 
ing, 207-9,  231,  247,  248 
Steinhuber,  Cardinal,  references  to, 

78,  79,  80,  8 1,  255 
Stepney,    Bishop  of,  Letter  to   The 
Times  (Reordinations),  57,  58,  61, 

"5 

Stubbs,  Reg.  Sacr.   Angl.,  reference 
to,  322  (note) 


Sulpicians/House  of,  visit  to,  39,  81, 

99 
Swedish    Church,    question    of   the 

Ordinations  of,  used  as  an  example, 

IS 


Tablet,  The— 

De  Re  Anglicana  and  the  Ris- 
posta translation  of,  in,  240 
(note) 

Letters  on  the  Barlow  docu- 
ments, 99,  102,  129,  157- 
68 

—  T.  A.  Lacey  on  the  Royal 
Mandate,  157-68 

Minor  references,  55,  123  (note), 

258 
Tavernier,  M.,  Editor  of  UUnivers, 

visit  to,  83 

Taylor,  Jeremy,  on  Holy  Orders,  288 
Theology    of   the    Bull    Apostolicae 
Curae,    a   Paper   read   at   Sion 
College,  285 
Thirlby,  Bishop — 

Embassy  to  Rome,  176,  243 
Retains  his  See  under  Edward 

VI  and  Mary,  243 
Vote  on   the   English    Ordinal, 

313,  316  (note),  322 
Thirty-Nine  Articles,  375  (note) 
Thomas,  Mgr.,  references  to,  30,  78 
Times,  The — 

Bishop  of   Stepney    (Reordina- 
tions), Letter  in,  57,  58,  61, 
125 
Encyclical  of  Leo  XIII,  abstract 

of,  published  in,  133 
Mr.    Gladstone's   Memorandum 
in,  78 

—  on,  237 

Tosti,  Abbate,  reference  to,  53,  68, 

134 

Tractarians,  references  to,  199,  204, 

205,  221,  233 

Tradition  of  the  Instruments,  38,  42, 
51,  101,  178,  263,  264,  277, 
279-81,   295,  301,   306,   380. 
See  also  Gordon  case 
Trent,   The   Council  of  (1562),  43, 
45,  48,  61,  98,  99,  121,  122,   141, 
199,  348  (note),  366,  370,  372,  373 
Elizabeth  and,  61,  121,  122 
Formal  definition  on  the  Essen- 
tial    Matter     in     Ordination 
avoided  by,  48,  98,  100,  298- 
300 

Tuke,  Letter  to,  from  Cromwell,  34, 
96-97,  127,  130 


420    A  ROMAN  DIARY  AND  OTHER  DOCUMENTS 


Tunstall,  Bishop,  deprivation  of,  212, 
242 

Vote   on   the   English   Ordinal, 

313,  319 

Turton,  Mr.,  reference  to,  72 
Tyrrell,  Fr.  George 

Treatment  of,  by  Rome,  25,  26 


U 

Unction,  Place  of,  in  the  Sacrament 
of  Order,  93,  380 

Priests  reconciled  by  use  of,  65, 

125,  126,  360  (note) 
Unicitas  and   Unitas,  distinction  be- 
tween, 84,  133 


Validity  of  Anglican  orders 

See    Anglican    Orders,    English 
Ordinal,  and  Names  of  Bishops 
Vannutelli,  Cardinal  Serafino,  refer- 
ences to,  63,  81,  129 

Interviews  with,  66,  76,  80 
Vannutelli,       Cardinal       Vincenzo, 

reference  to,  62,  63,  76,  115 
Vatican  Council,  reference  to,  206. 

See  also  Holy  Office 
Vatican   Library  and  Archives,    34 

96,  98,  127,  177 
Vaughan,  Fr.  Bernard,  on  Intention 

in  Anglican  Ordinations,  258 
Vaughan,  Cardinal,  adverse  attitude 
of,  6,  8,  9,  88 

Biography  of,  by  J.  G.   Snead- 

Cox,  6,  8 
De  Augustinis,  Memoir  of,  99, 

100,  254 

Minor  references,  61-133 
Vindication   of  the   Bull   Apos- 

tolicae  Curae,  328 

Venetian  State  Papers,  references  to, 
(30),  32»  34,  i?^  (note),  180  (note), 
324  (note) 

Vernacular  Services,  note  on,  71 
Victor,  Pope,  Action  of,  in  the  Pas- 
chal Controversy,  30 


Voysey,     Bishop,     Deprivation     of, 
212,  242 

W 

Waggett,  Fr. ,  reference  to,  36 
Wakering,  Bishop,   Royal    Mandate 

for  the  Consecration  of,  159,  166 
Weekly     Register     (Gordon     case), 

reference  to,  107 

Wharton,  Bishop,  reference  to,  104 
Retains  his  See  under  Edward  VI 

and  Mary,  243,  315 
Vote  on  the  English  Ordinal,  313 
Wilkins,    Pole's    Legatine  Constitu- 
tion, 94,  95 

Windsor  Commission,  315,  316  (note) 
Wiseman,    Cardinal,    references    to, 

22,  204 

Wood,  Rev.  E.  G.,  Correspondence 
with  T.  A.  Lacey,  87,  94,  97,  99, 
103,  106,  114,  127,  129,  130 
Discovery  of  the  Barlow  Docu- 
ments,  50,   51,  61,    64,    106, 

153 

On   the   form   Accipe   Spintum 
Sanctum,  97,  128 


York,  Archbishop  of,  reference  to,  in 
The  Risposta,  235  (note) 
Les  Ordinations  Anglicanes,  by 

Fr.  Puller,  Preface  by,  88 
Letter  to  M.  Portal,  29,  36,  91 
Mr.    Gladstone's  Memorandum, 

addressed   to,   71    (note),   78, 

139,  236 
Prayer  after  the  Litany,  in  the 

Ordination  Service,  52,  63,  65, 

"5 

Roman  visit,  the,  on,  88,  91 
Minor  references,  29,  89 
See  also  Reply  of  the  English 

Archbishops  to  Leo  XIII 


Zeitschrift  fur  Katholische  Theohgie, 
Review  of  De  Hierarchic  in,  5 


WILLIAM    BRENDON    AND    SON,    LTD, 
PRINTERS,    PLYMOUTH 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hilgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


MAY  2  2  1  91 


DUE  2  WKS  FROM  DOTE  RECEIVED 
Rtt'D 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A     000  040  300    6 


university 
Southen 
Library 


